Formative Assessment

Black’s and William’s article argues that formative assessment is an essential component of classroom instruction and its implementation can significantly improve student learning outcomes. They found that students who had experienced formative assessment strategies, particularly the low achievers, had demonstrated significant learning gains. For students to achieve these gains, they must be actively involved by using the feedback themselves for effective learning. According to the authors, the feedback given should focus on the quality of the student’s work, along with advice given on what the student can do to improve. It should avoid making comparison with other students. The authors also suggested that students be trained on how to self-assess and that teachers create opportunities for students to dialogue with them as ways to improve formative assessment. They also recommended for a change of policy and advocated four steps to implementation. This implementation is via teacher development and it entails the following: learning from development, dissemination, reducing obstacles and research. On the whole, both authors maintain that formative assessment is essential to effective teaching.

One thing that really caught my attention as I read this article was how “frequent assessment feedback” (p.83) has helped not only the low achievers but also those students with learning disabilities to enhance their learning. This is a wonderful piece of news to me as it not only validates my inquiry proposal project on the use of self-assessment to help high functioning children with special needs to overcome learned helplessness, but it helps to add on the sparse literature on the use of assessment for learning with children with special needs. For these students, the teachers will inevitably need to spend extra time to both teach and show them how to self-assess their work. But it is time well invested as self-assessment will help the children to become motivated, engaged and independent learners. According to Millar and Turner (1987) , “mildly handicapped students, particularly the learning disabled, have been described as ‘ inactive ’ (Torgeson, 1982), ‘passive,’ evidencing ‘learned helplessness’ (Gavalek and Raphel, 1982 ) ” (p.4) or “ showing a ‘ production deficit ’ (that is having ability, but not applying it)” (Millar, 1988, p.4). Self-assessment will therefore help these children to move out of their state of learned helplessness to one of active engagement. At the same time, it will shift the traditional decision making responsibility from the teacher to the students and cause teachers to rethink about their role, their students’ role and how they plan their lesson. While I am confident that the high functioning children with special needs can be taught how to self-assess, I wonder if low functioning children with special needs can be trained in like manner. Perhaps, there is a need for the authors of the article to define learning disabilities further.

As I read Black’s and William’s article, I was made to wonder about the role of school leaders. Other than giving support to the teachers to enable them try out and implement assessment for learning in the classroom, what else is required from them. I believe along with support, be it financial or technical, there is a need for school leaders to show patience. Making a fundamental change such as the introduction of assessment for learning into the classroom does take time. Both Black and William (2005) highlighted this in their article as well. They state that “fundamental change in education can be achieved only slowly – through programs of professional development that build on existing good practice” (p.82). It is interesting to see the use of the adverb “only” before another adverb “slowly” and I believe this is deliberate as the authors intend to impress upon the readers, in particular school leaders, of how slow change occurs. The idea of slowness is again reiterated by the authors when they discussed about the substantial rewards that comes from the use of formative assessment. Black and William state that the rewards are not seen quickly but it is a “relatively slow one and takes place through sustained programs of professional development and support” (p.88). In putting the adverb “relatively” before the verb “slow”, the authors not only stresses how slow rewards come from using formative assessment but it also implies the need to exercise patience when using formative assessments to help raise student achievement standards. In the light of this, school administrators must therefore give their teachers sufficient time to raise these standards in the classrooms as the latter is not achieved within a short period of time. They should exercise patience as well. Patience is a virtue which unfortunately some school leaders, who are so result oriented, may seriously lack. It a virtue that needs to be cultivated and will certainly be well appreciated by teachers who are embarking on innovative practices in the classrooms.

Other than patience, I believe it is equally important for school administrators to demonstrate assessment literacy if they want to implement the use of formative assessments in their schools. According to Stiggins (2001), “Sound assessment represents one essential key to school effectiveness” (p.13) and a principal’s role is “to advocate on behalf of balanced development and use of assessments” (p. 15). To take on this role, a school leader has to be sufficiently “assessment literate” (p. 15) so that he can “understand assessment results and promote an open and honest analysis of student success, both in the community and classroom” (p.15). But how many school leaders are sufficiently “assessment literate”? Stiggins states that there has been a “long history of failure in training teachers and administrators in effective assessments practice” (Stiggins, 2001, 26). What therefore is being done to address the lack of assessment literacy amongst school administrators? While I know that there are perhaps assessment courses offered for teachers to attend back at home, I am not sure if there are any being offered to school administrators. If there is none, perhaps school administrators should want to seriously consider enrolling themselves in those that are being offered to their staff. This is because knowledge of formative assessment will enhance the instructional leadership capacity of the school administrator. It would also, as Blase and Kirby (1992) state, enable them to lead effectively by standing behind. Leading by standing behind is amongst one of the many strategies effective school leaders use to bring out the best in the teachers.

Trust & Improvement in Schools

Louis’ article examines how trust affects teachers’ willingness to work with innovations introduced by central office administrators. Data was collected over a three-year period in five schools and were used to analyse “the centrality of trust to teachers’ willingness to work with administrators to implement continuous improvement and quality management practices for their schools and classrooms” (Louis, 2007,p.1). Two of the schools were characterized by high trust and high willingness to change. The remaining three were characterised by mistrust. Louis’ findings generally support Bryk and Schneider’s (2002) conclusion that trust is a core resource for school improvement and change. Where the trust level was high, change was easily introduced and vice-versa.

Three things stood out for me when I read the article. The first was this statement: “Many schools have weak overall levels of relational trust among adult employees, even when there are pockets of high relational trust in small groups of like-minded teachers (Goddard et.al, 2001, cited by Louis)”. As I reflect on this statement, I believe this is also generally reflective not only of the schools back home but my previous school as well. Louis’ states that it is the leaders who need to create and maintain trust. Between institutional and relational trust, the former is perhaps ranked higher than the former in our schools. Louis (2007) states that school leaders are required to create trust by having “daily relationships” (p.18) with their staff. This generally requires a conscientious effort on the part of school leaders to create this relationship. Also, it entails putting administrative work on the back burner rather than on the front burner as day-to day social exchanges take up time. Generally, most school leaders are so swamped by administrative work and deadlines that to find the time to engage in “daily relationships” or “day-to-day social exchanges” (Bryk and Schneider, 2003, p. 43) with their teachers is sometimes difficult, if not impossible for them to do. Perhaps that explains why many schools have weak overall levels of relational trust among adult employees Once a school administrator, I realized that I had not taken the time to engage in daily relationships with my staff due to heavy administrative work. Having read Louis’ article as well as Bryk and Schneider’s article, I am convinced that school administrators “must pay more attention to transactional considerations (usually categorized as manager)” (p.18) even while they try to achieve their “transformative goals (often associated with leadership). The phrase “more attention” indicates the tipping of the scale towards transactional considerations. This is something school administrators back home need to be conscious about and make every effort to ensure that the scale tips more to transactional considerations so that a climate of trust can be built up in their schools and trust as seen in Bryk and Schneider’s (2003) study has suggested that it can enlarge “the arena for legitimate action on the part of the administrators, and during a change process, this ‘goodwill’ can be an important resource” (p.18).

The second thing that stood out was the need for administrators to “assess current level of trust in a building prior to initiating a significant change” (Louis, 2007, p,18). This is indeed a wise step to take. Yet, this is not done. Often school administrators back home initiate change because of the directives that have from higher authorities. When they encounter resentment from the staff or when the outcome is unexpected, they often wonder why. The answer is possibly due to low relational trust in their schools. It is therefore wise to assess and address trust issues before initiating changes especially in schools where the level of trust is low. Personally, I feel that school leaders should also consider two other factors - timeliness and availability of resources when implementing a change in their organizations as these factors can affect the implementation and outcome of new initiative.

The third thing that stood out for me in the article was that “administrators …must be ruthless in scrutinizing how their behavior and context are interpreted by others” (Louis, 2007, p.19). Louis (2007) suggested using “techniques like rapid feedback 360 evaluations, in which subordinates and peers provide anonymous assessments of performance” (p.19). What troubles me is how many school administrators actually do this? Scrutinizing one’s own behavior and how one’s context is being interpreted by others can be a very sensitive issue for some school administrators. School administrators must have an open mind if they are to undertake such a task. Also, there needs to be a follow-up of the feedback from the 360 evaluations. For school administrators who are not ready for the 360 evaluation, perhaps they can ruthlessly engage in reflective practice as it can help increase their awareness of their professional performance and enable them to improve their performance (Blase and Blase, 2004). In a society such as ours that is so Asian and conservative in nature, reflective practice is perhaps more acceptable and non-threatening to the school leaders.

Relational Trust

In their article, both Bryk and Schneider (2003) identified relational trust as a key variable in increasing student learning. In their 4 year longitudinal study with 12 different school communities, they found that schools that had scored high on relational trust demonstrated marked improvements in students learning as opposed to schools that had low score on relational trust. They also identified four key components of trusting relationships: respect, personal regard, personal integrity and competence in core responsibilities and discussed the conditions or factors that fostered it.

Personally, I agree that it is essential for school leaders to build up relational trust with the school community. This is because teachers generally feel safe to take on new initiatives if there is a culture of trust in the school. From experience, I have seen how good school leaders, who I have worked under, take their schools to greater heights because of the relational trust that they have established with their staff. While it is essential for all school leaders to develop relational trust, it is strangely, not a topic of discussion back home and I wonder why. Perhaps it is time that relational trust becomes a conversational topic between school leaders and their middle managers and their staff so that a culture of trust can be built up.

Relational trust, I realize is not built overnight. Back home, everyone wants to see instant result or outcomes. Building up relational trust however takes time and school leaders must realize this. In trying to build relationships, it is common to see school leaders in Singapore organizing staff retreats and workshops for their respective schools. Bryk and Schneider however have so correctly pointed out that a “school cannot achieve relational trust simply through some workshop, retreat, or form of sensitivity training, although all of these activities can help” (p.43). Yet, school leaders continue to organize retreats and workshops for their staff. For me, retreats and workshops are seen as quick fixes and quick fixes are only temporary and do have lasting outcomes. School leaders should instead look into building lasting and sustainable relationships and Bryk and Schneider (2003) have shown that this can be done through “day-to-day social exchanges” (p.43) as trust “grows through exchanges in which actions validate these expectations”(p.43). As I will assume the role of a school leader upon my return, this article serves as a good reminder that I should make a conscientious effort to build relational trust. In fact, it should be my main priority and administrative work secondary as it is “a core resource for school reforms”. It is an area that I would also like to impress upon my Heads of Department as they too take on department initiatives with their teachers so as to contribute to school wide improvements. According to Kaser and Halbert (2009) “strong levels of trust and respectful relationships are precondition for successful school improvement initiatives. When adult relationships are characterised by trust, the stories about change shift from indifference or negativity to possibility and hope” (p.43). As trust is amongst one of six important leadership mindsets that Kaser and Halbert (2009) have identified, every leader should therefore seriously consider the building of relational trust a priority because it serves to enhance the overall school climate as well as contribute to student learning.

While I agree with Bryk and Schneider that a school principal in a troubled school community may need to “remove a few problematic teachers” as they undermine trust, the removal of such teachers however requires moral courage. What troubles me is that most school leaders find the job of removing problematic teachers uncomfortable. I have often heard school leaders saying, “I prefer not to rock the boat”. As I reflect on this statement, I begin to wonder how fair this is to the school or the children under their charges? If indeed school leaders genuinely want their schools to make progress, they must have the moral courage to remove such teachers from their schools. To me, courage is linked to intense moral purpose. School leaders with intense moral purpose will know that it is their responsibility to change those things that “they have control over in order to alleviate disadvantage and promote the deeply human fulfillment of young people” (Starratt, 2004, p.144). They will also be determined to improve the life chances of their learners and be committed to providing with the highest possible quality learning experience. Having a moral purpose is therefore essential as it provides one with the moral courage to do what is right for the common good. It is also essential to “sustaining successful leadership” (Day and Littlewood (eds), 2007, p.176) and an equally important leadership mindset to acquire other than relational trust.

Reclaiming the Intellect, Owning Our Learning

This phrase captures my thoughts today on research method limitations and their effect on teacher inquiry. The philosophy underlying quantitative research assumes that if the method is appropriate, the results will be generalizable to other settings. In other words, an expert can tell you from studying a large enough sample elsewhere, what you should be doing in your school. However, in education, few practices can be imported to a new setting with dependably reliable results. So much is at play in how teachers understand any given innovation and whether it corresponds with their existing beliefs. The degree and quality of implementation can vary widely, based on local conditions. So perhaps the whole assumption that others can generate knowledge that we, as educators, implement blindly, is to be questioned.

However, the quantitative research tradition has mystified the tools for knowledge construction and made them inaccessible to teachers trying to turn observations into knowledge into their own classrooms and schools. Last summer I heard about a school improvement book that I have mean meaning to order, about teachers "reclaiming the intellect". In order for this reclaiming to occur, and for teachers to become critical thinkers about their own professional actions, I think researchers need to legitimize rather than undermine professional inquiry. The ways that teachers make informed instructional decisions needs to be articulated and validated and not dismissed as "unreliable" or "anecdotal". Only then will teachers own their learning and have the confidence to critique it for themselves.

Why is this troubling me now? I've been helping so many students develop inquiry projects and research proposals and there is always so much that must be written about the limitations of the method, an academic tradition.However, one colleague, an expert in narrative research, insists that we should never apologize for our method. I hope there will come a time when the opportunities or affordances of a qualitative research method, such as professional inquiry, are richly understood and appreciated and the limitations are acknowledged in a way that doesn't limit teachers' ability to think.

Some Thoughts on Winter in the Season Walk

I wanted to share a "Winter" idea with you. On my wall hang two Sid Dickens' tiles, both of "The Tree of Life". The first one was released in 1996, the second in 2007 (The Tree of Life - Evolution). Sid attaches the following descriptions to them: "Winter is the season to dream the beginning. Like this great tree we are all rooted in one earth, ever changing, ever growing." When I was gifted the first one, I attached the following quote to the back - - "Winter preserves and strengthens a tree. Rather than expending its strength on the exterior surface the tree forces its sap deeper into its interior. In winter a tougher, more resilient life is firmly established. Winter is necessary for the tree to survive and flourish." (Richard Foster) I thought both these ideas fit in the context of change - as Winter can represent the initial birth of an idea (to dream the beginning) and the time for reflection, gathering strength and corrective action - in both the cycle of the seasons and the cycle of change.

How to Read Journal Articles

Hi, Everyone,

As I prepare for our class on Saturday, I have found an article that I would like to share with you. You can access it by clicking on the text that looks different here: It's Not Harry Potter. The article is written for professors but it emphasizes the fact that we need to teach graduate students to read academic journal articles in a different way than you might read a book for entertainment. For those of you who are classroom teachers, we know now that this change in approach to different kinds of reading is also an important lesson for our young students. Don't worry if you haven't read the article before class - the beauty of blogs is that it will be here for you when you have a few minutes.

Survey Results and Working on the Work

It turns out that the leadership mindsets that have the most resonance for most of us are first TRUST and then LEARNING FOR DEEP UNDERSTANDING, which account for two thirds of our responses. I've been looking at videos from the Phil Schlecty Center and our responses make me think of his assertion that teachers have control over only two things: our relationships with students and the work we design for them. The theme of the professional learning he offers is "Working on the Work" or "WOW" - learning to design assignments that fully engage more students - inviting them to become attentive, persistent, and committed. In contrast, many of our students are currently disengaged or they are merely compliant.

Here are a couple of short videoclips you may find interesting:
Schlecty on Engagement, and Schlecty on Student Work.

Also check out the cartoon on changing schools on the Schlecty Center homepage: The Way Things Are, The Way Things Should Be.

Finally, I want to mention the presence of two of the key concepts in organizational change that I often talk about: social symmetry (my term) and creative tension. The Kaser and Halbert Trust chapter talks more about adult relationships in the school, but the notion of social symmetry, like the symmetry we find in a butterfly's wings, shows that one reflects the other. It is much more likely to find healthy teacher-student relationships in a school where adult relationships are healthy - there are norms of collaboration and shared responsibility. Creative tension, or the pull to excellence, is evident in the points Schlecty makes, in the homepage cartoon, between what we have and what we want, or the current reality and the preferred future.