Why call it Empowered Learning?

I finally understand why a group of my colleagues chose a fancy name, Empowered Learning, for their journey.  They decided to change the way they handle assessments and student engagement.  It seemed like they were simply taking the MYP assessment criteria and applying them to every assignment they gave, so why the need for a fancy new name?  I think it's all about framing.

As I dive in to using only standards based grading this year, I anticipate some push back from students and their parents.  After all, change can be a scary thing.  It's fair for parents to want what's best for their students.  They have their kids' best interests in mind.  Fortunately we teachers do, too.  Whenever I am challenged (I mean that in a good way) about the new and improved way I am running my class, I will tell people I am empowering students to learn.  The way I am empowering students is by helping them to reach a set of performance standards rather than assigning points to tasks.  Somehow I don't think a parent would say to me, "Well I don't want you to empower my student to learn!"  The parent or student might need reassurance, and that is absolutely fine.  However, if I were to answer that I decided not to use points anymore in favor of using standards based grading, now there is something to resist.

When I think about it, my own evaluation is based on a set of standards.  In fact, these standards are shown to me in advance.  During an evaluation my administrators don't say, "You earned 85/100 points on giving tests, 80/100 on contacting parents, and 90/100 on classroom management.  You have an average of 85%."  My administrators tell me how well I performed against a set of standards.  Now I will be gauging the performance of my students according to a set of standards, helping them to reach those standards, and empowering them to learn.  Learning how to reach a specific standard is a skill that transfers to other areas outside of school.

Open the Door

So, for us, standards-based grading is defined by three characteristics: students are constantly working towards mastery of a predefined set of standards; they have regular and honest feedback from experts whom they trust; and they practice collaboratively in a safe environment where they can learn from failure. I've been working with those ideas now for 18 months, and all I've written about here is what that does to my students. But, it has recently occurred to me that I should also write about what it has done to ME. 

When I started teaching (15 years ago now), I had fantastic mentors. These were professionals who had been in the business for close to 30 years and who took me under their wings; they were people who were masters of their content and incredibly talented teachers; they opened their files and invited me to browse and pillage and steal whatever I needed. I am so appreciative of all they did for me as a young teacher. Once I had my bag of tricks and a few years under my belt, I got into a steady rhythm. I felt like I knew what I should be doing, and I went into my room and did it. I found myself regularly saying "I don't love all the bureaucratic stuff, but when I close my door and can do my thing, I'm really happy." I could see how someone would want to do this job for 30, even 40 years.  

Then, I heard Lou Marchesano speak in the fall of 2012, and I wanted to change the way I was teaching. Somewhere between then and now, somewhere in the process of changing my teaching practice to standards-based grading, I have become an SBG learner, and it has completely transformed how I see what teaching can be for me. As we all do, I want to reach the highest standard in my teaching, but, just like my students, I can’t get better without those three characteristics: clearly defined goals for my teaching practice, constant and honest feedback from peers and coaches whom I trust, and collaborative practice in a safe environment. For me, those clearly defined standards came from Lou Marchesano. I use his expertise--and others in the field--as the standard for what I want to create in my classroom. The constant and honest feedback comes from my colleagues and administrators as well as my students ... and their parents … people who ask me hard questions, point out flaws, make suggestions, and force me to get to the heart of what I am doing and why I am doing it.  Last year, in a presentation to our district, Kevin Honeycutt said, “perfect is the enemy of done,”and  that really resonated with me. It’s not easy--I’m programmed to want perfection before I begin. And, let’s face it, that’s how we’ve programmed a lot of our students. So, admitting flaws and listening to suggestions are things I'm still working on. 

But for me, the best part about being an SBG learner is that I don’t have to do it alone. I know I can try and stumble and try again, and it changes everything for me. Sitting around with colleagues who are passionate about this idea, after school, in the summer, over email, there is just an amazing energy, even when it takes 4 hours to decide the phrase "most reflective score" to share with parents. I've never more badly craved watching my colleagues who are on this journey, teach. I want to watch and learn and ask and share and experience. And I get a rush from every moment of real collaboration, moments that are a lot more frequent now that we've all become students who are working towards the same goal--is this what our students feel like when the machine is in full swing? I could still do without the bureaucratic drama, but I find myself wanting everyone to have open doors as they do their thing. Imagine the potential. THIS is something I can see myself doing for the next 15 years.