Deb Weston – Page 9

November 21, 2017 Deb Weston Assessment, Homework, Interviews, Math

Does Homework Work?

The Purpose and Politics of Homework

After teaching for over 18 years, one topic which is frequently addressed in parent/teacher interviews is homework. Often parents see homework as being critical to academic success. It’s a topic often debated and never really resolved, even for me as a teacher and as a parent.

In my teaching practice, parents consistently ask me for homework. They believe that doing homework, such as math sheets, makes their children smarter and better students. Parents often feel that “busy” work, such as math and language sheets should be provided by teachers.

Alfie Kohn, an American author and lecturer in the areas of education, parenting, and human behaviour has examined this topic on many fronts. According to Kohn, “no research has ever found a benefit to assigning homework (of any kind or in any amount) in elementary school {i.e. grades 1 to 6). In fact, there isn’t even a positive correlation between, on the one hand, having younger children do some homework (vs. none), or more (vs. less), and, on the other hand, any measure of achievement” (Kohn, n.d.). In other words, homework is not linked to academic achievement in the early grades. Kohn does mention that in middle and high school, homework does impact math and science achievement, especially in higher socio-economic communities.

As a teacher, for homework, I usually assign 30 minutes of reading every night. But parents often scoff at my suggestion that reading is homework, probably as it produces no visible work. In addition, when assigning journal writing, for homework, it usually does not get done. Parents find it hard to get their children to write a journal … parents state “it is a lot of work because my child resists writing”. Now they have a glimpse into my job as a teacher. I believe that parents want homework to keep their children busy and it reminds them of the days when they did their homework.

I find it frustrating that when I do assign homework like bringing in materials for class projects, it does not happen. Often collecting homework is more work for me, especially when I have to chase after students for it. Ironically, I do not use homework for assessing students because it is completed away from school and may not have been done by the student.

So what is the purpose of homework?

1. Practice: Is the purpose of homework to promote practice of concepts?

Yes, homework can be useful in practicing math concepts or writing in the form of journals. In this case, it is important for homework completion to be advocated by the student. Teachers or parents cannot force a student to do this work. When parents ask me how to make their child complete homework, I often cite the phrase “you can take the horse to water, but you can’t make him drink”.

In my own parenting experience, with all my encouraging and some threats, I could not make my son complete his homework. I state this after spending hours working beside my son to get his homework done. In using this strategy, in the end, the responsibility of completing his homework was passed on from him to me … and it was not my homework! When my son entered high school, I gave up on the homework battle and he proceeded not to do his homework on his own. He completed high school and went on to post secondary school where he did not do his homework. My daughter was a different story. She had solid learning skills and a strong work ethic. I only got involved with her homework when she needed help. As a hard worker, she exceeded her brother in her academic success as university is about being smart and working hard.

When I assign homework, as a teacher, I wonder what level of stress I am putting on parents who try to help their children with homework I send home?

2. Completion of work not completed in class: “Work not done in class is homework!”

As a middle school teacher, I have observed two types of students – those who complete work in class and those who socialize in class. The middle school years are an exciting time for students as peers become very important in their lives. Hanging out with friends becomes the main reason for coming to school. Returning from holidays results in many hours of catching up with peers. Due to this very social time in students’ lives, individual and group work assigned in class is not always completed in the timeframe assigned by teachers. This means teachers need to allow more time for work.

As a teacher, it has been suggested by parents of not keeping middle school students on task or not giving enough time to complete assignments. The bottom line for me is that I give plenty of time for work to be completed and do my best to keep students on task. I challenge anyone to keep 30 grade 8 students, with varying academic abilities, on task while helping several other students in need. It’s like trying to herd 30 cats. When parents complain to me about their child’s incomplete work, I state that the student simply did not use class time wisely and needs to finish the work at home.

In my middle school experience, often students need to complete work at home because they did not complete it in class. Several times, students have returned essays and assignments to me that is completed at the “university level” and it is clear that the student did not complete the work on their own.

In the end, homework still remains a contentious topic. As a middle and high school student, I did homework to complete assignments and practice for math tests. I was not an A student at the time, but my homework routine allowed me to develop solid work habits for my future education.

After writing this blog, I still have no clear answers as to the effectiveness of assigning homework probably because each student is different. This school year, I will be assigning math homework as my grade 4/5 students are as keen to do it as their parents are to see it assigned. I’ll reflect on how this year progresses and see if it impacts my teaching and their learning. And I won’t make it too hard so the parents understand it too.

Below are some resources you can share with parents to help them support their child’s learning.

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/parentGuideLitEn.pdf

Reading and Writing with Your Child

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/parentGuideNumEn.pdf

Alfie Kohn Comments about Homework

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2012/11/26/homework-an-unnecessary-evil-surprising-findings-from-new-research/?utm_term=.c2875ad9cb3a

November 5, 2017January 28, 2018 Deb Weston Curriculum Planning, Math

5 Things Teachers Need to Know to Teach Math

$Math Wordle$

Here’s 5 things that are important to know if you teach math …

Mathematical objects or learning objects (i.e. using manipulatives or models)

These help students figure out and explain their thinking. Manipulatives (concrete or virtual) tend to draw out students’ need to explain and focus on different representations and meanings of mathematics concepts and models. In addition, learning objects/manipulatives can actually act as models of understanding (Tichá & Hošpesová, 2009). Objects are especially valuable for students still functioning at a concrete level of thinking. Helping students chose appropriate manipulatives is important as protractors are not usually used to measure straight lines.

Connectedness (i.e. to real life and to all strands of math)

Teachers need to make connections between and among different math strands as well as concepts and procedures. Math concepts are interrelated for example, multiplication is repeated addition and subtraction is the opposite of addition. Division and multiplication are interrelated and opposite and are interrelated to fractions, decimals, and ratios. Teachers need to make these connections to prevent students from using math concepts and procedures in isolation. Further, teachers need to connect math to real world applications such as How do carpenters make sure a door is installed right? … they measure the diagonals to make sure they are equal (equal diagonals means the door is installed at right angles). The teaching of math is not presented as a “unified body of knowledge” when taught in singular isolation (Ma,1999, p.122).

Multiple Perspectives (i.e. solving problems different/flexible ways)

Teachers need to stress the idea that multiple solutions are possible but also explain that some approaches to solutions and methods are more appropriate in certain situations. This multiple perspective allows students to be flexible in their thinking and understanding of the content.

Basic Ideas (i.e. key ideas/understandings)

When teaching math, teachers stress basic ideas and key understandings. For example, when solving a problem, students can use an equation to provide proof of their answer. Showing their answers different ways can reaffirm their proof.

Longitudinal Coherence (also known as curriculum and learning trajectories i.e. how curriculum is related between grade levels)

Teachers need to be aware of what is being taught at all levels of the elementary math curriculum and not just the grades that they are teaching or have taught. When teachers know the math curriculum well, they know where their students’ learning has come from and where it is going. When only knowing the assigned math grade level being taught, teachers miss out in identifying students’ gaps in their math learning. When there is a gap in learning a math concept, teachers can employ “numeracy recovery” just as “reading recovery” is used to help struggling readers. When teachers take opportunities to review key understandings, they can put in place the appropriate foundation for students’ future math achievement.

An effective way of presenting this knowledge is following the development of a specific math concept through the grades – see Grade 1 to 6 Multiplication Learning Trajectory below.

Multiplication Learning Trajectories with curriculum

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

References:

https://buildingmathematicians.wordpress.com/tag/teaching-mathematics/

https://www.mathrecovery.org/pdfs/how-it-works/Math-Recovery-Research-White-Paper.pdf

Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tichá, M., & Hošpesová, A. (2009, January). Problem posing and development of pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service teacher training. In meeting of CERME (Vol. 6). From proceedings of CERME 6, January 28th-February 1st 2009, Lyon France INRP2010 1

October 22, 2017October 22, 2017 Deb Weston Differentiated Instruction, Diverse Learning Needs, Planning

What 21st Century Learning Looks Like in 2017

While considering what 21st Century looks like to teachers, students, and in classroom, my Primary/Junior Math AQ colleagues, Ms. Sicondolfo, Ms. Hawkyard and I, developed this summary.

This summary has helped me consider how modern learning looks in 2017.

What 21st Century Learning Looks Like in 2017 chart

This work was inspired by Peel District School Board’s Empowering Modern Learners #peel21st.

October 22, 2017July 6, 2018 Deb Weston General

Qualified to Teach Math?

$Teaching Math$

During a professional development session in math, I recently heard a person note that there is no link between good math instruction and teacher university qualifications in math. My BSD detector went up … not what you are thinking BTW … banal statement detector (BSD).

The statement de-linking math knowledge with good math instruction makes no sense to me. What I do know is that many of my colleagues have not taken math since grade 10 and dropped math because they lacked confidence in the subject. These teachers were assigned to teach math at the junior and intermediate level. To further add to the challenges of instructing math, in the recent inquiry approach to math, teachers now cannot simply hand out worksheets and mark tests … they have to check for students’ understanding of what a math concept means. Understanding math concepts involves understanding relationships and interconnections among and between math strands.

An example of concepts in number sense is that multiplication is a form of repeated addition and that subtraction is an opposite function of addition. e.g. 12 = 3+3+3+3 or 12 = 3 groups of 4 or has the factors of 3 x 2 x 2 or 12 = 24 – 3-3-3-3.
An example of a concept in fractions is that common fractions are related to decimals and percentages. e.g. ¾ = 75/100 = 0.75 = 75% which can be shown using discrete models, number line models, area models, and volume models. I once knew a teacher who always made her math tests out of 100 as she had trouble calculating percentages.
An example of an algebraic concept is that “x” represents real numbers and that subsets of real numbers can be natural numbers, whole numbers, integers, rational numbers, and irrational numbers. Confusion occurs between the concept of a constant like 4 is always 4 and a variable x can represent any number.

I did a quick literature review on the subject of math teacher qualifications. Researchers found that “teacher experience, education, and licensure test scores have positive effects … These effects are large for math” (Buddin & Zamorro, 2009). University of Toronto researchers found that teacher candidates in the Master of Teaching degree lacked basic math competencies to be considered literate (Reid & Reid, 2017).

Other researchers emphasized that “content knowledge in math is an important construct that can either support or hinder progress toward exemplary classroom instruction” (Philipp et al., 2007 cited in Reid & Reid, 2017).

Ball, Thames, and Phelps (2008) suggest that the absence of improved math instruction is resultant from teachers’ lack of content knowledge within this subject area. “Teachers who do not themselves know a subject well are not likely to have the knowledge they need to help students learn this content” (p. 404).

Reid and Reid (2017) highlighted that 50% of Canadian high school students drop math as soon as they can only taking compulsory courses in grade 10 or 11 (Amgen Canada Inc, 2013). This information was reinforced by a quote from a research participant in the elementary stream explaining math anxiety and dropping high school math as soon as possible … “And then when math became an option, like enough … I’m done with math!”

Reid and Reid (2017) recommended that teacher education programs establish a minimum of math competency standards, enhance coherence between Master of Teaching math courses and practicum placements, and provide additional support for teacher candidates with low math proficiency (with scores of 75% or below on the Math pre-test).

So where does the information state that math teachers do not have to have a math background. According to Sean Cavanagh, an associate editor for Education Week, math majors or test scores are not a good indicator of quality math instruction (Cavanagh, 2009). But teachers who have math-based majors such as science, computers, and engineering, did provide quality instruction in math (Wu et. al., 2017). Betty Ray, edutopia’s senior editor at large, wrote that “It seems there’s no strong evidence that teachers who have college math degrees get better results with students than teachers who don’t, at least in elementary and middle school.”

Or maybe there’s a lack of qualified math teachers? I could continue with my investigation but I’ll stop here.

Things I know:
I am a better science teacher because I learned about science in my science degree. I am a better math teacher because I took many grade 12 math courses with a qualified math teacher. My understanding of math continued to grow with a math related business degree. But because I have an ancillary understanding of French does not mean I should be teaching French.

Your turn to be heard. What do you think?

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

Teachers Need to be Taught Math

Teachers Shortage in Math

Should Math Teachers have Math Degrees

For Many Math Teachers, Math Just Doesn’t Add Up

Amgen Canada Inc., & Let’s Talk Science. (2013). Spotlight on science learning: The high cost of dropping science and math. Retrieved from http://www.letstalkscience.ca/images/SpotlightOnScienceLearning-2013.pdf

Cavanagh, S. (2017). Majoring in Math Not Always a Classroom Plus downloaded at https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/11/25/13mathteach.h29.html?qs=majoring+in+math+not+always+a+classroom+plus

Resources from Peer Reviewed Journals

Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal for Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. doi:10.1177/0022487108324554

Buddin, R., & Zamarro, G. (2009). Teacher qualifications and student achievement in urban elementary schools. Journal of Urban Economics, 66(2), 103-115.

Desimone, L., Hochberg, E. D., & McMaken, J. (2016). Teacher Knowledge and Instructional Quality of Beginning Teachers: Growth and Linkages. Teachers College Record, 118(5), n5.

Philipp, R., Ambrose, R., Lamb, L., Sowder, J., Schappelle, B., Sowder, L., . . . Chauvot, J. (2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematical content knowledge and beliefs of prospective elementary school teachers: An experimental study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(5), 438-476.

Reid, M., & Reid, S. (2017). Learning to be a math teacher: What knowledge is essential?. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(4), 851-872.

Wu, L. C., Chao, L. L., Cheng, P. Y., Tuan, H. L., & Guo, C. J. (2017). Elementary Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Professional Teaching Competencies: Differences Between Teachers of Math/Science Majors and Non-math/Science Majors in Taiwan. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-14.

October 15, 2017 Deb Weston Report Cards

Reports Cards: Then (1939) & Now (2017)

While going through my mother-in-law’s belongings, I came across her Grade 5 report card from 1939. So given report card writing is pending, I have decided to deconstruct how much report cards have changed in 78 years!

Beside the addition of subject and learning skill comments, report cards have not changed that much over this time. In both report cards, students still get a letter grade or percentage. The big difference is that the students are ranked by placement in their class or school – this meant that evaluations could vary based on the academic level of the students’ cohort. Students’ evaluations were very similar and yes, students get an “I” for incomplete work in both 1939 and 2017!

The subjects have changed moderately. The subjects listed are reflective of societal needs of worker skills. Reading and writing is still listed in 1939 and 2017; students did not get a communication or a media mark in 1939 … because the Internet was not invented yet. Communications meant writing a letter to your grandparents or sending a telegraph. Phones were still pretty expensive. Even in the early 1970s, my great aunt, living in Markdale, Ontario, still shared a party line. The students in 1939 needed a overall understanding of mathematics which probably focused on number facts and calculating – because they were not carrying around computers in their pockets! In 1939, social studies dealt with geography and British History, no Canadian history. When I went to school in the 1970s, we studied American and world history … no Canadian history either. In 1939, the arts meant drawing and science was nature studies. There was no assessment for physical education, only health. Both girls and boys studied manual arts – home economics for girls and trades for boys.

Learning skills and work habits are a little more sophisticated in 2017 compared to 1939 but we could still apply the categories used in 1939 for “General Conduct” and “Attitude to Work”. Both report cards keep track of lates and absences as this is where school funding originates.

In 1939, Teachers reported to parents more often with monthly Lates, Days Absent, General Conduct, and Attitude to Work. Standings in Subjects, Rank in Grade, and Number of Pupils were reported every two months. Class size has not changed that much in 78 years. KHO’s class had class sizes between 32 to 37 students. When I taught grade 5, my classes varied between 23 to 33 students. With recent changes in class size, the cap of 25 students is more of a suggestion than a limit as students inevitably show up after schools’ reorganization day.

Overall, in 78 years, I know we’ve improved our reporting to parents. The 2017 report cards are more specific for learning skills and work habits and what is being covered in subject areas. Even though it takes a great deal of time to complete these report cards, the format is an improvement. Using my professional judgment, I work very hard to capture my students’ progress … and I’ll say it again … it’s a lot of work!

But I personally believe that if we can give parents and students a good snapshot of their progress, it’s worth it.

Report Cards Then and Now Chart

October 1, 2017April 15, 2018 Deb Weston Assessment, Celebrating Success, Making a Difference Through Education, Math

Why our public education system is awesome!

$PISA 2015 results by country Math$

Recently, during a discussion in an AQ course @ed_rego, we started talking about math scores and the effectiveness of Ontario’s public education system. Ed Rego mentioned Ontario and Canada’s success on the international front. Not only do Canadian students rank high on the international front, its public education system also makes a difference in students’ lives. Let’s look at some reveling data first.

1. Canada ranks high in international testing.

In my studies on education, I discovered how well Canada does on international test scores, especially in relation to the United States. The Organization for Economic Co-operation or OECD conducts yearly tests to rank countries based on performance in science, reading, mathematics (Program for International Student Assessment or PISA) and trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) in both French and English. Students are randomly selected by age (15 year olds for PISA) or by grade level (Grades 4 and 8 for TIMSS).

In 2015, Canadian 15 year olds ranked 4th in science , reading, and mathematics among the PISA results tied with Finland. Singapore, Japan, and Estonia were the only countries to surpass us (Chinese countries include Taipei, Macao, Hong Kong, and B-S-J-G China) . The United Kingdom came in 10th place and the United States came in 20th place. The trends show Canada varies only slightly between testing years. Also note, in Canada, all 15 year old students, of all abilities, participate in our education system and thus would be possible participants in the PISA testing. Also note that Canada does not have weekend “Cram School” as part of our educational landscape. Cram School focuses on rote learning and not critical thinking. In addition, some countries stream students with learning challenges away from formal education. A breakdown of PISA 2015 results for specific provinces can be accessed below.

In 2015, Canadian students ranked 8th in grade 8 mathematics surpassed by Singapore, Korea, China Taipei, Hong Kong, Japan, Russia, and Kazakhstan. England ranked 10th and the United States ranked 11th. Norway students ranked 14th in mathematics. Finland scores were not listed. In science, Canadian students ranked 13th in grade 8 surpassed by Singapore, Japan, China Taipei, Korea, Slovenia, Hong Kong, Russia, England, Kazakhstan, Ireland, United States, and Hungary. Norway students ranked 18th in science. A breakdown of TIMSS 2015 results for specific provinces can be accessed below.

These PISA and TIMSS scores show strong results for both Canada and Ontario, particularly in light of the latest decrease in mathematics EQAO scores in 2017. From these results, I can conclude that Canada’s public education system does a very good job educating our students, even on an international level.

Note: I did not analyse the breakdown of grade 4 test scores as the introduction of specific Canadian curriculum differs in mathematics from other countries.

Canada’s 15-year-old students among best global performers in science, math

Breakdown of Canada’s PISA scores for 2015.

2015 mathematics TIMSS results

2015 science TIMSS results

TIMSS 2015 Ontario result breakdown

2. Canada teaches students how to critically think and engage in rational discourse.

As Heather Mallick of the Toronto Star stated, our public education system teaches “to value thought over feeling, reason over passion” (Mallick, Toronto Star, November 12, 2016). Canadian teaches do not accept writing with statements without supporting details that come from credible sources. Teachers teach the difference between real news and false news.

3. Canadian public education socializes students.

All students, from all backgrounds (i.e. age, gender, cultural background, socio-economic status, or ability) participate in Canada’s public education system. Students are not segregated based on background, culture, or socio-economic status. Students all learn together. Teachers teach values of inclusion for all and education for all. Students learn to get along with others from many different backgrounds and many different places in the world. And this level of national inclusion, is one thing that makes me proud to be a Canadian citizen and a Canadian teacher.

Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy

4. Canada’s public education is equitable and democratic.

Canada’s public education system (almost) compensates for disadvantages that impact student learning. Canada’s public education system gives students from all background (due to age, gender, cultural background, socio-economic status, or ability), an opportunity to succeed in school. Newly-arrived immigrant students rapidly integrate enough to perform the same as their Canadian classmates. Dr. John Jerrim (UCL Institute of Education in London) stated that Canada’s high league table ranking reflects the narrow socio-economic gap in school results. The outcome is that Canada’s score show a very high average, with relatively little difference between advantaged and disadvantaged students. The OECD states that Canada supports social equity as “Schools should provide a good education for all students, regardless of their parents’ education or career. PISA assesses to what extent differences in education outcomes are associated with the social status of parents as well as the performance gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. It also identifies the share of students who perform well, despite coming from disadvantaged backgrounds, known as resilient students.” (OECD, 2015)

PISA 2015 Key Findings for Canada

How Canada became an education superpower

I end this blog with the words of John Dewey …

It is no accident that all democracies have put a high estimate upon education; that schooling has been their first care and enduring charge. Only through education can equality of opportunity be anything more than a phrase. Accidental inequalities of birth, wealth, and learning are always tending to restrict the opportunities of some as compared with those of others. Only free and continued education can counteract those forces which are always at work to restore, in however changed a form, feudal oligarchy. Democracy has to be born anew every generation, and education is its midwife. (Dewey, 1916, The Need of an Industrial Education in an Industrial Democracy)

Let’s celebrate Canada’s public education system success as a democratic and well educated nation – for I believe this is why we are one of the best places to live in the world.

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

This blog was inspired by an article written by Heather Mallick, Toronto Star, November 12, 2016.

September 28, 2017 Deb Weston Learning in a Real Life Context, Making a Difference Through Education, Mentorship, Occasional Teachers, Occasional Teaching, Professional Learning and Growth

Always a Mentee, Always a Mentor

This year, I‘m in a new school, in a new role. This September, every school day, I’m trying to figure out where my class is suppose to be and what and how I need to teach my students with special education needs. I am gradually learning the names of my colleagues but it seems like I can only get either their first name or the last name – I cannot put the person’s whole name together. My role in this special education classroom involves using a very prescribed program to support struggling readers and I’m still figuring it out.

And our school went through re-org (reorganization). This meant redoing class lists and changing rooms. The first week of school, my room 204 was organized and I had my bulletin boards decorated. After spending two and half weeks setting it up, I had to change rooms. Really? I moved all my stuff to room 102, redoing the bulletin boards and redoing the schedule so my students and I know where and when we are suppose to be.

You’d think this would not be a challenge for me as I am in my 18th year of teaching. But every time I take on a new role, I start all over again. Why do I do this? Because every time I take on a new role, I learn, a lot.

This year, my colleague and mentor, DHS, has been wonderful in supporting me through my transition into the school and into my program. Her contemplative stance has helped me work out various decisions and challenges. She also helped me set up my newly located classroom.

Over the past 18 years, I have been a mentee and mentor. I am a big believer in “Paying it Forward”.

My first teaching mentor was AT. She was my first practicum teacher and I was very fortunate to work with her as a grade level teaching partner. AT welcomed me into teaching with an open heart and a guiding hand. She showed me how to teach and I still use what she taught me today. I’ve had other mentors who were not teachers. My Vice Principal, AMW, walked me through a new program that I started in our school. The best part of AMW was that she was straightforward with me and challenged me in areas where I needed to grow. AMW was and is a great listener and guide.

At about my 7th year of developing my teaching practice, I became a mentor to other teachers. As a mentor to another teacher, I quickly realized that this mentoring process was not about me and my success but about my mentee and their success. I’ve mentored many teachers formally and informally.

My first “official” NTIP (New Teacher Induction Program) mentee was BT. He was a grade 8 Math and Science teacher, like me. After a couple of weeks of teaching grade 8, he was going to quit teaching. He told me (his words) “I did not give up going into the tech sector to deal with this stuff” – he actually used another word. I still remember him pulling up a chair directly in front of my desk and putting his head in his hands. I listened to him talk about the challenges of teaching grade 8 – which can be many and very disconcerting to a grade 8 teacher. BT was ready to jump off the teaching wall in this first month of teaching. I talked him off the wall. We spent time planning and working together – he got through the year without having to take a leave of absence or worse, quitting teaching. I knew he was going to be a great teacher because he was upset and cared about his work. Today, BT is a great teacher. When I saw him recently, I was so proud for his success.

I’ve also informally mentored Long-term Occasional teachers. HK was teaching grade 8 Math and Science. My Vice Principal asked me to help her as she needed collegial support. Unfortunately, at that time, occasional teachers did not have access to NTIP support. HK was dealing with similar challenges I had faced (and BT had faced) as a grade 8 teacher. HK was a highly skilled and dedicated new teacher that was driven to make a difference in her students’ lives. We spoke often and met every week at a well known coffee location. There were tears and many stories. It was a tough cohort year of grade 8s in our school. She made it through and has gone on to be a very strong and dedicated teacher. I am very proud of how well she has done in her career.

I’ve mentored other teachers too. One teacher came from South Africa and was looking for Canadian experience. She spent time in my grade 7 classes, learning how we teach in Ontario. I directed her towards many resources she used for courses she needed to upgrade her credentials. To my delight, she ended up getting a full time teaching position a year later.

More recently, I mentored a newly graduated teacher, who helped out in my contained special education class. SM was keen, very well qualified (i.e. she had French) and working two jobs. She was a natural when working with my academically challenged students. She ended up volunteering in a French class at our school and then landed a full time teaching position.

After many positive and fulfilling experiences, I continue my career as a mentee and as a mentor. It’s part of our teaching practice and it’s part of our career path. We are teachers for our students and our colleagues.

And even as an 18 year plus teacher, I thank my colleagues for all the mentorship, collaboration, and support they continue to give me, every day.

I believe that when working collaboratively, teachers are better together.

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

Partnering for Success Getting the most from Ontario’s New Teacher Induction Program: A Resource Handbook for Mentors

Ontario Teacher Federation: Survive & Thrive

September 28, 2017September 28, 2017 Deb Weston agency, Assessment, Challenging Topics, Communication Tools, Diverse Learning Needs, English As Second Language (ESL), English Language Learners (ELLs), General, Mentorship, Professional Judgement, Professional Learning and Growth, Report Cards

Report Cards Are Coming: Professional Reporting

Elementary Report Cards … the mere mention of report cards can send some teachers into anxious ridden days and sleepless nights. Even after 17 years of writing elementary report cards, I anticipated that my levels of anxiety would be non-existent but, no, for me, the thought of report card writing still stresses me out. I know of some colleagues who are so anxious about report card writing, that they had to seek medical support.

The source of this anxiety is embedded in inconsistencies in how report card policy is implemented. And the source of the inconsistencies is rooted in the process of educational policy implementation. With each level of educational policy implementation gatekeepers, such as boards of education, superintendents, schools, administrators, and classroom teachers, all interpret and change the policy based on their own context and their own perspectives (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012).

As report card policy initiatives are translated into real life, the policy stakeholders, like administrators and teachers, adapt and reinvent their interpretation of the policy into school contexts. Since the education policy guidelines tend to be abstract and non specific, confusion and disjointedness results (Ball, 1993), and teachers end up decoding and recoding the policy text such as the reporting policy, Growing Success (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010). Even with the well written Growing Success document (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010), the process of understanding and translating report card policy can result in various degrees of intentional and unintentional interpretations (Fuhrman, Clune, & Elmore, 1991). Or, in other words, there are inconsistencies in report card policy implementation. Competing theories between policy authors (i.e., governments and school boards) and report card implementers (i.e., principals and teachers) can cause conflicts between the vision of policy and the practice of policy (Timperley & Parr, 2005). This can result in gatekeepers’ experiencing “most carefully planned” initiatives unfolding in a “non-linear manner” (Timperley & Robinson, 2000, p. 47).

This policy implementation process results in the practice of report card writing that look different from the vision of the report card policy writers. Therefore, because of this flux, report card formats and content can change from school board to school board, school to school, year to year, administrator to administrator, and sometimes even term to term (Note: this is strictly based on my own experience over 17 years). As noted earlier, at every level of implementation, each person put their own spin on the policy. The result is that teachers have to deal with changing report card writing expectations. Inconsistencies directly result in teachers having to spend a great deal of time trying to meet the expectations of different stakeholders. Teachers then have to use their professional judgement to interpret these expectations.

The document Growing Success (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 152) states “ Judgement that is informed by professional knowledge of curriculum expectations, context, evidence of learning, methods of instruction and assessment, and the criteria and standards that indicate success in student learning. In professional practice, judgement involves a purposeful and systematic thinking process that evolves in terms of accuracy and insight with ongoing reflection and self-correction.”

Further, Growing Success states that “successful implementation of policy depends on the professional judgement of educators at all levels, as well as on educators’ ability to work together” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 2). It is through educators’ collaboration that educational change becomes reality; it is how policy becomes practice. “Teachers’ professional judgements are at the heart of effective assessment, evaluation, and reporting of student achievement.” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 8). So teachers, working with other stakeholders, using their professional judgement need “to clarify and share their understanding of policy and to develop and share effective implementation practices” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 2).

Below is a breakdown of the Growing Success policy based on areas I have needed information on while writing report cards. This is not an exhaustive list. Please refer to the documents noted below for further information.

Ontario Report Card Policy Breakdown with reference to report card writing

The Growing Success document notes the following “It is important that teachers have the opportunity to compose and use personalized comments on report cards as an alternative to selecting from a prepared set of standard comments. School boards should not enact policies that prevent teachers from providing personalized comments on report cards. It is expected that principals will support best practice and encourage teachers to generate their own comments.” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 64)

Given the focus of encouraging “teachers to generate their own comments”, having a bank of pre-approved board-wide report card comments available to elementary teachers may or may not be forthcoming.

After the above analysis and reflection regarding report card writing and professional judgement, I ask myself “What has helped me the most in report card writing?”

My answer is collaborating with other teachers. It is in the discussion, co-creating, and sharing of report card comments that I have been supported the most in my writing of the Progress, Term 1, and Term 2 report cards. For me, sharing report card comments does not mean that I simply “cut and paste” my colleagues’ work. This does not happen because I write comments through the lens of my own teaching practice. My colleagues’ shared learning skill comments often inspire me to write comments especially for challenging students.

In writing report cards, I use my professional experience and knowledge that has resulted in the development of my professional judgement. So my advice to any teacher who is being challenge in report card writing is to reach out to your colleague … for advice, support, or debate.

I believe that when working collaboratively, teachers are better together … especially when writing report cards.

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

References

Ball, S. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories, and toolboxes. Discourse, 13(2), 10-17.

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. New York, NY: Routledge.

Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario. (ETFO). (2016). The elementary provincial report card continued implementation update – Grades 1 to 8, Professional Relations Services, PRS, Volume #66, January 2016. Retrieved from http://www.etfo.ca/SupportingMembers/Employees/PDF%20Versions/The%20Elementary%20Provincial%20Report%20Card%20Continued%20Implementation%20Update%20-%20Grades%201%20to%208.pdf

Fuhrman, S., Clune, W., & Elmore, R. (1991). Research on education reform: Lessons on the implementation of policy (pp. 197-218). AR Odden, Education Policy Implementation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2000). The Ontario Student Record (OSR) Guideline, Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/curricul/osr/osr.pdf

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). Growing success: Assessment, evaluation, and reporting in Ontario schools, First Edition, Covering Grades 1 to 12 Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/growSuccess.pdf

Timperley, H. S., & Parr, J. M. (2005). Theory competition and the process of change. Journal of Educational Change, 6(3), 227-251.

Timperley, H., & Robinson, V. (2000). Workload and the professional culture of teachers. Educational Management & Administration, 28(1), p. 47-62.

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.

August 24, 2017December 31, 2018 Deb Weston Curriculum Planning, Integration

What is Integrated Curriculum/Studies?

As an elementary teacher, I have always integrated curriculum. The first reason to integrate is to cover a myriad of curriculum expectations; the second reason is that some curriculum just naturally flow together. Integrated curriculum programs show high levels of student engagement and academic performance (Clausen & Drake, 2010). Some curriculum natural fits include Science/Geography, History/English, and Mathematics/Science. Some Arts subjects, such as Drama and Visual Arts, make a multilayered approached to lessons and assessments as they add an additional venue to show learning. In middle school, I have had great success teaching the combined subjects of Math/Science (4 years in grade 8) and Language/Social Studies (4 years in grade 7).

In my master’s thesis work, I explored the concept of using Drama to teach Science. I developed many engaging lessons to act out Science concepts. As I implemented these lessons, I noticed that Science concepts were being well covered but, Drama concepts were not. In the lessons, Science was the main course and Drama was the side dish. As a PhD student, I taught a pre-service course in integrated studies at Brock University. The Intermediate/Senior pre-service teachers had challenges implementing the concepts into their practice, especially given the curriculum content requirements for secondary school credit courses.

Through my 18 years teaching at the elementary level (grades 2 to 8), I have come to realized that trying to integrate every subject into a unit or assessment is fruitless as one subject is always dominant (or the main course). For example, Mathematics always needs to be the main course because as a side dish, it is not covered to the depth in which is needed. As the middle school grades get into the depth of the curriculum content, it gets harder for teachers to cover a particular subjects well because the curriculum expectations are more extensive . Due to this, core subjects such as Mathematics and Science are taught separately in grades 9 to 12 at the secondary school level.

Project-based instruction (Boss & Krauss, 2007) relies on the idea of integrated curriculum/studies. It is an interesting concept but as a researcher, I have found little peer-reviewed documentation stating it was sustainable in all school settings and at all grade levels. In addition, there are many versions of models (Drake, 2007) that may or may not fit into schools’ organizational or physical structures. For example, teaching integrated curriculum units requires teachers to share equipment and other resources at the same time. In addition, teachers must be provided with additional planning time to accommodate the increased planning and collaboration needed so teachers can work together (Boss & Krauss, 2007).

Integrated curriculum models can vary greatly. Some models are curriculum driven and some are timetable driven. Timetable driven models present some challenges as there is always one class that gets a missmash of teachers teaching parts of various content areas. Based on my own anecdotal evidence, I have seen timetables where teachers are sharing Math strands with one teacher teaching Data Management/Probability and the other teaching all other Math strands. I have known of homeroom classes to have up to 5 teachers teaching the core curriculum content while other classes just have their homeroom teacher teaching these subjects. Given this model, I wonder how equitable and inclusive this particular timetable is for all students.

As a teacher with experience teaching grades 2 to 8, I find curriculum integration works well up to grade 6. After grade 6, the content curriculum is too deep for teachers to plan and teach all strands. I find it is also very taxing for teachers to deal with the complexity of curriculum integration and in addition, have to face the challenges of having many students with Special Education, English language learning, and behaviour needs. Further, the amount of content knowledge teachers need to teach these subjects is great. In Ontario, intermediate teachers need only two teachable subjects. In integrated curriculum models, teachers are expected to be generalists instead of specialists. This is especially challenging when some teachers do not have university Math credits or Math qualifications.

Project-based instruction is set in a collaborative-driven collegial framework.”Planning for integrated curriculum is a collaborative venture [where] educators use a backward design approach” (Wiggings & McTighe, 2005). “Teachers begin by exploring expectations to determine the most important to know, do, and be, on how to assess student outcomes” (Drake & Reid, 2010). Project-based curriculum integration texts, such as Reinventing Project-Based Learning (Boss & Krauss, 2007) provide teachers with the “what to do” but not always the “how to do it”. Nor do these texts (usually US based), account for the accountability of teachers to cover the curriculum required by their ministry or board. These texts do not account for the extra time teachers need to collaborate as timetables may not free up extra time for joint meetings within the instructional day. Teacher collaboration can have its own challenges as it can be hindered by competition and individualism amongst colleagues (Fullan & Hargreaves, 2012; Hargreaves, 1994; Weston, 2015).

The idea of integrated studies/curriculum, can be done well, but not at a full-blown, “teaching with all subjects” together model. Some curriculum subjects, especially Math, need to be the main dish and need to be at the main focus of lessons and assessments. Further, schools need to re-structure their time tables to allow teachers to collaborate to develop integrated lessons and assessments. And I believe that when working collaboratively, teachers are better together.

Integrated curriculum/studies can be a very striking way to engage students, especially since it reflects multi-disciplined real life world. But the “all-or-nothing” integrated curriculum exhausts teachers, teaching everything, and leaves many subjects taught as second thought, side dishes.

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

References

Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Reinventing project-based learning. Your field guide to real-world projects in the digital age. International Society for Technology in Education, Washington, DC.

Clausen, K. W., & Drake, S. M. (2010). Interdisciplinary Practices in Ontario: Past, Present, and Future. Issues in integrative studies, 28, 69-108. Downloaded at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101101

Drake, S. & Reid, J. (2010)., Integrated Curriculum, What works? Research into practice Series, Government of Ontario. Downloaded at http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Integrated_Curriculum.pdf

Drake, S. M. (2007). Creating Standards-Based Integrated Curriculum: Aligning Curriculum, Content, Assessment, and Instruction. Corwin Press, A SAGE Publications Company. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320.

Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.

Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. Teachers College Press.

Weston, D. (2015). Investigating the relationships between teacher identity norms and collaboration. PhD Thesis, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON. Downloaded at http://dr.library.brocku.ca/handle/10

August 24, 2017March 20, 2018 Deb Weston agency, Anti-bullying, Building Inclusion, Challenging Topics, Communication with Parents and Guardians, Diverse Learning Needs, Equity, LGBTQ2S, Social Justice

So why teach LGBTQIT human rights?

“Coming out hasn’t come as far as we think”

(Emma Teitel, national affairs columnist, Toronto Star, August 11, 2017, A8)

“Coming out” as a LGBTQIT* person, by making friends and family aware that they are not part of the heterosexual majority, has many implications. Specifically, LGBTQIT people who are not part of the “heterosexual” norm deal with great social, health, emotional, and economic barriers. Our LGBTQIT students, colleagues, and parents, regularly deal with discrimination on many levels including bullying and threats of violence. This is why not all LGBTQT people come out. According to an online Quebec survey (commissioned by the Foundation Jasmin Roy, an anti bullying/violence organization), it was reported that 45 percent of LGBTQIT respondents said they kept their sexual orientation or gender identity hidden due to worries of discrimination (Teitel, August 11, 2017). In the survey, 81 percent of LGBTQIT respondents agreed that Canadians are open-minded about gender and sexuality but 75 percent believed that more work needed to be done to support the LGBTQIT communities (Teitel, August 11, 2017).

So why do teachers need to teach LGBTQIT human rights?

Why do teachers need to address these topics in Ontario classrooms? (especially when some parents disagree with teaching about sexuality and gender)

The new health and physical education curriculum (Government of Ontario, 2015a), dealing with LGBTQIT topics, was updated in 2010 after remaining untouched since 1998. After protests by some religious groups, the Liberal government backed away from an attempted update of the health and physical education curriculum in 2010 (National Post, February 2015). The Ontario Health and Physical Education Curriculum was the most outdated curriculum in Canada (Rushowy, September 2015).

In 2015, Premier Kathleen Wynn vowed that the updated curriculum would be implemented in the 2015/2016 school year.

In September 2015, the curriculum was introduced into Ontario schools. There was a strong backlash from parents and communities. Often the groups opposed to any curriculum dealing with sexuality and gender were misinformed by the content of the contentious parts of the health curriculum. To repond to this, the Government of Ontario developed A Parent’s Guide: Human Development and Sexual Health in the Health and Physical Education Curriculum (Government of Ontario, 2015b).

The Peel Board of Education’s director, Tony Pontes, stated that “We cannot — we will not — by action or inaction endorse discrimination,” who cited Ontario’s Human Rights Code as applying to people of all sexual orientation and gender identity. Mr. Pontes went on to state that “Supported by legal opinion, bolstered by our core values, I would no more say yes to someone wanting a child excluded because of a discussion about LGBTQ than I would a discussion about race or gender.” (Rushowy, September 2015). Further, Mr. Pontes stated that while some parents had “genuine concerns”, the board would work to address issues brought up by the critics of the updated sex-ed curriculum. These critics misinformed parents in order to “raise fear, generate untruths and build constituencies of protest based on false information” (Rushowy, September 2015). Mr. Pontes, the director of the Peel Board of Education, found this unconscionable. In addition, Mr. Pontes stated that the Peel Board of Education was willing to lose students over its stance of inclusion for all (Rushowy, September 2015). Some school boards lost students and some teachers lost teaching positions (based on my own anecdotal observations). Often, there are costs as a result of taking a stance to uphold human rights.

In 2015, even though I was not a “Health and Physical Education” teacher, I did deal with issues around sexuality and gender. In our school, we had students and colleagues that presented as LGBTQIT. In addition, we discussed LGBTQIT inclusion during the Day of Pink and while discussing human rights topics. I received notes from parents asking me not to talk about same sex couples on the Day of Pink. I also had students missing from school on the Day of Pink. Some parents believed that discussions of inclusion were only limited to specific school days. Parents needed to realize that teachers talk about inclusion, as needed, especially when students rights are being suppressed. Inclusion is not limited to skin colour, culture, religion, chosen head coverings, ethnicity, ancestry, citizenship, disability, or diet.

Teachers do not get to pick and choose which topics of inclusion they will address because all issues regarding human rights apply.

Some of my teacher colleagues have stated that they do not honour LGBTQIT rights. Some students have told me that their parents do not believe in LGBTQIT rights. I have had parents phone me to tell me not to discuss LGBTQIT rights in class. Imagine what would happen if a parent, student, or teacher stated that they did not want teachers to teach about the rights of people of different races or religions.

As teachers, we must honour the rights of all people because we provide educational services within the province of Ontario. It is part of our role, as teachers, to uphold human rights and protect against discrimination as per the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, s. 1; 1999, c. 6, s. 28 (1); 2001, c. 32, s. 27 (1); 2005, c. 5, s. 32 (1); 2012, c. 7, s. 1. (Ontario Human Rights Code, updated December 5, 2016)

As teachers, there is no opting out of the Human Rights Code.

Toronto Star national affairs columnist, Emma Teitel was accepted by her family and friends when she told them she was gay. She stated that coming out “sucks, even for the lucky ones like me” (Teitel, August 10, 2017). Yes, her family and friends accepted her for who she was. She affirmed that there is still a long way to go. Teitel stated that she still faces challenges when kissing her partner in public without getting “molested by creeps”. She hopes that one day that “thousands of transgendered people [will] no longer fear for their lives every time they step out their doors” (Teitel, August 10, 2017). Ms. Teitel wishes this for all people in the LGBTQIT community.

As a parent of a gay adult child, I hope one day my daughter can live her life with her partner, in peace, without being stared at every time they hold hands in public. I hope that with the work of the Ontario education system, being LGBTQIT will be part of an inclusive culture in Ontario.

Collaboratively Yours,

Deb Weston

*LGBTQIT is a short form for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Questioning, Intersexual, Two-spirited people (please note this is my most recent understanding of the term)

References

Government of Ontario, (2016). Ontario Human Rights Code. Downloaded from https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h19

Government of Ontario. (2015a). The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education, 2015 (revised), Government of Ontario. Downloaded from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health.html

Government of Ontario. (2015b). A Parent’s Guide: Human Development and Sexual Health in the Health and Physical Education Curriculum, Government of Ontario. Downloaded from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/HPEgrades1to6.pdf

Rushowy, K., (September 2, 2015). Peel board won’t exempt kids from learning about gay families, gender issues, Toronto Star, Downloaded from https://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/education/2015/09/02/peel-board-wont-exempt-kids-from-learning-about-gay-families-gender-issues.html

Teitel, E., (August 10, 2017), Coming out sucks, even for the lucky ones like me, Toronto Star, Downloaded from https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/08/10/coming-out-sucks-even-for-the-lucky-ones-like-me-teitel.html

Teitel, E., (August 11, 2017), Coming out hasn’t come as far as we think, Toronto Star, A8. Downloaded from http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/1493875-opinion-coming-out-hasn%E2%80%99t-come-as-far-as-we-think

The National Post. (February 23, 2015). National Post View: New sex ed curriculum should be sensitive to all sides, The National Post, Downloaded from http://nationalpost.com/opinion/national-post-view-new-sex-ed-curriculum-should-be-sensitive-to-all-sides/wcm/596af7c3-9704-4a2f-aad7-543cb8bbc99a