What Can Schools Learn from Reality Shows?

Since moving out of Asia, I’ve been shocked by the sheer number of home improvement reality shows both in Australia and in the US. I notice the confusion, the speculation, and the disagreements teams have when designing or redesigning a space.

Can’t the contestants just go to IKEA, assemble some items, and make the house work? Of course not. Along the way, teams discover leaky pipes, faulty wires, and shoddy insulation – things they never factored in to the original plan or budget. Builders could ignore these issues, assemble the trimmings, and make it all look nice. But the structures won’t last.

So why do educators think that learning can be built from assembling some items produced by textbook companies? If teachers follow the pre-assembled scripts, texts, and activities, are they fostering understanding or creating a facade?

Teachers can learn lessons about curriculum from reality shows, particularly home improvement reality shows.

This post expands on the house-building analogy, taking a slightly different spin on the house analogy used in Schooling by Design: Mission, Action, and Achievement
(although the foundational ideas are the same – pun intended).

In Terms of Building a House…

Outcomes or Standards are the specs. Curriculum is the blueprint. Textbooks or resources are the materials you use to build and furnish the house.

If you’re building a house, you know what you want. You’re pretty clear about the specs. If you’re following Common Core or Australian Curriculum, the specs (outcomes) are set for you.

Outcomes are not curriculum. Outcomes comprise lists of what students should know and be able to do. Outcomes are often called standards because all students should know and be able to do these things when they leave school. By analysing the outcomes, you learn what a child leaving school should “look like” academically.

Architects use the specs to create a blueprint. Teachers use outcomes to design curriculum. Curriculum is a set of plans, or an ‘academic blueprint’, that show how a teacher will lead students to achieve the outcomes.

Textbooks, in contrast, are resources that may or may not be included in a set of curriculum documents. Admittedly, textbook companies try and write materials that align with outcomes. Relying on a textbook company to write your curriculum is like going to IKEA, picking out a bunch of furniture, assembling it all according to instructions, and hoping you come out with a house.

Teachers are both the architect and the builder. They must know what the final outcomes look like. They then design curriculum units and individual lesson plans. Finally, they assemble or create resources and use them to their full potential. Teachers notice which parts of the written curriculum are working or not working and re-design the curriculum blueprint as necessary. It’s likely curriculum will be designed differently according to the needs of a particular class or the resources available.

While standards are standardised, instruction should not be. Teachers should not be mandated to follow scripted programs. Doing so is like asking reality show contestants to build a facade over leaky pipes. No one program can fix student misconceptions and meet the needs of all students. Teachers cannot ignore foundational differences in student needs in order to finish programs. If you exclusively trust packaged materials, you build a hovel of learning that comprises a random clutter of facts and skils.

Get the plan right before building and purchasing materials.

I often hear teachers and other school leaders saying that they want to find a curriculum for Common Core or Australian Curriculum standards. What they’re really saying is this: We are looking for the “magic bullet” educational materials that will help students’ test scores improve.

Imagine builders who decide they want a fireplace, a pizza oven and a home theatre system – very cool items they’ve seen in other houses. To preserve money and time for such luxuries, they fire the architect.

Bricks for the fireplace arrive at the house. Leather reclining chairs are dropped off along with a gynormous television and state-of-the art surround sound equipment. Then come another stack of bricks and some metal items presumably for the oven.

Suddenly, the builders realise there is no room for the TV and no outdoor wall fit for a fireplace. Should the pizza oven go inside or outside of the house?

Sounds ridiculous. But educators do it. Without engineering a curriculum, we purchase levelled readers, iPad apps for 500+ devices, microscopes and bunsen burners – all of which are fantastic learning tools within a solid curriculum plan. We complete a school year realising we never touched half of the apps. Students couldn’t use the bunsen burners because there was no budget for safety goggles, and only one teacher knew how to use the levelled readers.

Reality show contestants have a very small budget – much like schools. They can’t afford to measure incorrectly or purchase unnecessary materials. As educators, we can’t afford to purchase items that we can’t use. If time is taken to design solid units of study we can make more informed choices about what materials are most useful. 

Make sure the curriculum blueprints are solid.

The decor should match the personality of homeowner.

I can’t allow students to be creative or learn what interests them. If I do, we won’t have time to cover everything they need for the standardised tests.

As stated earlier, you can teach to standards without standardising instruction. The wiggle room comes in knowing that standards include what students should be able to do.

Take, for example, a writing standard consistent with Common Core and Australian Curriculum: [Students will be able to] Write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons.

Classroom A: A school purchases materials that guide the class through a step-by-step process of writing essays. Teachers follow the lessons as prescribed. All students write opinion essays about homework, the topic suggested by the publisher.

Classroom B: The teacher realises that opinion pieces are stronger with research, and research skills and nonfiction reading skills are also listed as outcomes. The teacher designs a unit around the question How can my writing change people’s minds? The teacher allows students to choose their topics but expects them to demonstrate research, nonfiction reading, and persuasive writing skills within their areas of interest. When teaching research skills, a boy interested in dinosaurs evaluates sources of information about dinosaurs. A girl evaluates sources writing about Justin Bieber. After finding reliable sources, the teacher creates mini-lessons that teach students to break articles into chunks, write margin notes, and use post-its to form follow-up questions and thesis statements. Finally, the boy chooses to write an opinion piece convincing people that volcanic eruptions led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. The girl writes an opinion piece about how Justin’s Bieber’s early music is better than his current hits.

Both classes teach to standards, but the teacher in Classroom B is able to engage students by allowing them to demonstrate skills in the context of their interests. 

Using the analogy of a house, both Classroom A and B build a nonfiction opinion-writing ‘room’ in the house. Students in classroom B connect the persuasive ‘room’ with research skills and nonfiction reading ‘rooms’. They choose the rooms’ decor, creating a final project they are proud to share.

It is not necessary to standardise instruction in order to hit the same standards. Schools can maintain creativity and passion in a standards-based classroom.

Home improvement reality show contestants work in pairs.

Contestants do the design thinking together then separate and work on different aspects of the plan. They regularly pull back together to address an unexpected problem or assess completed work.

Curriculum design is hard work. Teachers should work together on the original design thinking. They can distribute the labour related to finding and creating resources to use within those units. Problems will arise that require creative solutions – and teachers can come back together to think through possible solutions.

In the end, people will judge your work.

Contestants in reality shows get judged and receive scores. The scores are subjective – sometimes we agree with the judges and sometimes we don’t. While it’s easy to focus on who is winning, it’s good to remember that each of the houses ends up looking heaps better than it did in the beginning.

Schools are judged by students’ performance on standardised tests. As unfair as it seems, the tests aren’t going away. If standardised tests are the only visible evidence of learning we give the community, that is the only evidence by which we will be judged.

By carefully designing curriculum, students demonstrate authentic learning in ways that elicit the “Wow!” factor from parents and members of the community. Parents beam when their son or daughter independently works on a project at home, Imagine the proud smile on a parents face when they read a persuasive letter from their child, outlining all the reasons the child should be able have ears pierced.

Let’s make authentic projects and assessments embedded in well-designed curriculum be the measure by which our schools are judged. In the process, students will learn information necessary for standardised tests. I promise.

We have work to do in education. But, we have innovative teachers who care about student passions and are capable of creating lessons that teach to standards. Accomplished teachers know their students and how they learn.

We’re not building houses, but we’re building learning environments. Let’s teach to the standards in ways that are individualized, differentiated, and personalized.

What curriculum units are you writing?

If this post was helpful, please share it with a friend. Also consider subscribing to Expat Educator. I promise not to spam or share your email with others.

The photo was purchased from freedigitalphotos.com. 

Teaching Oral Reading Fluency to Older Students

My father taught me to read with fluency and expression. He didn’t know he was doing it. Every Sunday afternoon, my brother and I would sit with him by the heater or on the porch and he would read us the Sunday comics. Characters such as Beetle Bailey, Charlie Brown, Dennis the Menace, and the Wizard of Id each had their own voices.

If you walk into a Lower Primary grade classroom, you’ll likely see students reading aloud to teachers who explicitly teach them to read more smoothly and read with expression. Do Upper Primary and Middle School teachers need to focus on oral reading fluency? If so, how can upper grade teachers explicitly instruct students on fluency without it feeling “childish”?

How does Oral Reading Fluency Fit into Common Core Standards?

The Common Core standards include oral reading fluency as part of the Reading Foundational Skills. Until grade 2, foundational skills focus on students understanding print features, translating print features into words, syllables, and sounds. Until grade 6, foundational skills comprise phonics, word analysis, accuracy, and fluency as they support comprehension.

Does this mean teachers can stop teaching oral reading fluency after grade 6? Probably not. While Common Core Reading Foundational skills are discontinued at Grade 6, Middle School teachers still need to know the following:

• Are the students recognizing at least 95% of the words they are reading?
• Do students use phrasing, punctuation, and italics to pick up on author’s intent?
• Do students differentiate between characters by hearing the characters’ different “voices”?

Oral reading fluency does not necessarily align with silent reading fluency, but oral reading fluency can indicate what happens in students’ heads when they read silently.

When students read fluently, they are better able to analyze of the impact of word choice on meaning or tone. Students who read fluently can better analyze poetic and musical tools in poems and stories (Grades 6 and 7 Reading Literature Standard 4).

Students who differentiate character voices more easily analyze ways in which authors develop and contrast points of view of different characters. (Grade 7 Reading Literature Standard 6).

How to Teach Fluency Without It Feeling Childish

Comics and Graphic Novels: Almost all of my struggling readers gravitate to comics like Garfield and Calvin and Hobbes. In the context of reading fluency, those books are a good place to start. How would Calvin’s voice be different from the voice of Hobbes? Have students record some of their favorite strips or pages. The listener should be able to hear the difference and the recorder should be able to defend why he/she chose the particular type of voice. Let the student “ham it up.” Then move the student to graphic novels.

Plays: Like most other skills, fluency and expression come with practice. Plays allow students that practice. The difficulty is that, unless well-planned, play reading becomes another form of round-robin reading that can quickly disengage students. Also, cold readings of plays set up lower-fluency readers and second language students for public scrutiny. I recommend the following progression of activities:

• Before assigning parts or having anyone read aloud, have the students read the play silently. Ask about the characters. What type of person is…? What do you think his or her voice would sound like? How would specific characters sit? Stand? What kinds of clothes would the characters wear? Hairstyles?
• Find out if anyone is particularly “attached to a part”. If two or more people want the same parts, you can delegate in whatever age-appropriate way you deem best (rock-paper-scissors), dual recordings (multiple girls play Broadway’s Annie). Consider challenging higher readers to play (and understand) the character they identify with the least.
• Highlight the importance of practice. Line. By. Line. Model mistakes and re-takes until the line is perfect. Model how you decide which word in a sentence should be emphasized – and how sentence meanings change slightly based on the emphasis (let students help you decide which sounds best).
• Give students recording devices to record, listen, evaluate, repeat. They should keep/save recordings of the best “take” of each line or section.
• Pair up students who listen to each others’ recordings and offer advice.
• Then meet as a group to read the play orally. Record. Garage Band is a great recording tool. If someone makes an error, they can pause then read the line over again. Errors are easily erased.

If you’re teaching fluency to two or more groups, allow the groups to compare the line interpretations. How did someone else read the same part similarly? Differently? Why do you think they made those particular choices?

Morning class:

Afternoon class:

Modifications for English Language Learners

When listening to the podcasts above, you will notice that each podcast features a student who has limited English. Consider recording lines with the students who struggle with English pronunciation. Then, transfer the practice session to iTunes (or .mp3), and have students practice reading with the recording.

End With Reflection

When I started doing class news videos, I realized that students could easily tell me what they did, but had a harder time telling me what they learned.

Take the time to ask students what they learned about reading fluency. What was difficult at first? Which lines needed the most practice? Why do you think the [tongue-in-cheek mean/crazy] teacher would ask you to do this? How might these skills be valuable when reading other texts?

If you are unfamiliar with the workings of Garage Band, see this tutorial:

…but you don’t need Garage Band. Here is a tutorial on iPad Voice Recorder (also featured on iTouches):

In what other ways might older students practice reading fluency?

If you like what you read and hear, consider subscribing to Expat Educator (below).

Monday Mentions

Over the past couple of weeks, the posts below have given me reason to pause and ponder – savored with some combination of coffee, wine, and chocolate…

Are We Wringing the Creativity Out of Our Kids?

Teaching is a balancing act. On the one hand, we want students to be creative. Ideally, students independently explore topics of interest and demonstrate learning in a format of their choice.

On the other hand, we must measure and report learning as it relates to educational standards.

To what extent can the two expectations coexist?

Just Trying to be Better Than Yesterday

I love it when a fellow writer is able to articulate the seemingly indescribable. Author Kenny Pieper reminds us that we all experience foibles – lessons we plan perfectly that don’t run as expected. His article conjured up memories of my mother’s tongue-in-cheek comment: My lessons would run perfectly were it not for the students.

Kenny’s smooth writing style makes me want to open a bottle of wine and be swallowed up by a recliner. A good read. Really.

Don’t Underestimate the Quiet Ones

As a self-proclaimed social media introvert, I appreciate it when authors speak for folks like me who choose their words carefully. These are a few things about me that are often misunderstood:

• I’m not arguing with you…but that doesn’t mean I agree with you.
• I’d rather ask questions than give my opinion – especially at first. After hearing everyone’s point of view and digging through the research, I’ll come back with a few suggestions on how to move forward.
• I prefer to say difficult things directly to people – in a quiet place where no one loses face. I’ve probably said tough things to plenty of colleagues – you just haven’t been around to hear them.

Grade the Work, Not the Behavior

Ah, one of my soap box topics. When I coach teachers, I often ask teachers to do the following:

1. Articulate what you are seeing.
2. Decide if what you see is an academic issue or a behavioral issue (sometimes it is a technical issue).
3. Address the correct problem. Grades should reflect what student know and are able to do. Behavioral issues require a one-on-one conversation with the student. Try to “get into their heads” to identify the obstacles to being on time, submitting work, etc.
4. If unsure, address the academic issue first. Many students hide academic challenges with behaviors that help them save face in front of peers. When the student feels successful, discuss ways you can help the student in the future – so that the disruption need not precede the academic assistance.
5. If the issue is behavioral and a one-on-one conversation ineffective, round up a team of parents, counselors, and principals for intervention and support.

7 More Ways to Go from On-Task to Engaged

Bryan Harris has some great quotes:

Increasing time on task is pointless if the tasks themselves are not productive (quoting John Hattie).

While praise may encourage effort, specific feedback is necessary in order to truly learn and grow.

Some of the most valuable and long-lasting learning comes from the personal insights and “ah-hahs” we discover when learning about ourselves.

What have you read lately?

If you like what you read, consider subscribing to Expat Educator (below).