Laura K Spencer, Ed.D.

Category: Personalization and Agency

Stupid Normal Distribution Curve

“Life is all about getting A’s. Not some stupid normal distribution curve.”
– Ken Blanchard, author of over 50 books on leadership

Ken Blanchard has studied, and written books on, servant leadership. Servant leadership consists of two elements: The visionary role, which is the leadership element of servant leadership; and the implementation role, which is the servant element of servant leadership.
According to Blanchard, the visionary aspect of servant leadership establishes a compelling vision that includes the purpose, the path forward, and the values that will guide the journey. It is, as Blanchard explains, the sense of direction.

Once the vision is clear, the leaders role shifts into that of servant, in which the leader does all they can to help their team members accomplish goals, solve problems, and live according to the vision.

The best educators are servant leaders. As leaders, they set the vision in the classroom. What is the purpose of learning this content? How will we learn it? And what experiences and connections will guide us along the way? It’s the lesson design. The framework build that connects standards in meaningful ways. The pedagogical conversations around thinking and learning and skills that matter most.

Once that vision is established, the servant aspect carries out the implementation of those goals. What prior knowledge and skills do students need to learn this content? How will I assess if they have that knowledge/skill? What skills do students need to use this knowledge in a real world context? What experiences must I provide to create engaging and relevant connections? How will I ensure that each student gets what s/he needs to find success?

No where in Blanchard’s servant leadership description does it include an element to ensure that only some employees are successful. Nowhere in the corporate HR manual does it say 30% of employees must be fired every year. So why is there a normal distribution curve in education? Why do we assume it’s okay that not every student achieves personal success? And why do we build assessments that are meant to trick students, or prove they don’t know it all? Ken Blanchard calls out the “stupid normal distribution curve” and he’s right.

As a professor, Blanchard knows that it is his job to do all he can to ensure every student earns ‘A’ grades. “Don’t mark my paper” he and his friend Garry Ridge (WD-40 CEO) say. “Help me get an A.” That’s a true servant leader. That’s the type of leader I like to work for, and that’s the type of educator I want educating my children.

February 26, 2018
What Do I Think I Know and What Do I Have to Learn?

You never know what you will learn when you step outside your bubble.

The other day on LinkedIn I saw an event posted by Garry Ridge, CEO of WD-40. It was the Annual Breakfast for the MS in Executive Leadership program at University of San Diego, followed by a panel about servant leadership, creating a culture of values, and how business skills empower performance. All invited. “Why not?” I thought. I’m on vacation, so let’s see what this is all about. A fortuitous decision!

On the panel: Ken Blanchard, best selling author of over 50 books on leadership, Garry Ridge, and Barbara Lougee, Associate Dean of Graduate Programs and Associate Professor of Accounting. I have pages of notes (for future blog posts), but today I want to write about one inspirational nugget.

Garry Ridge, CEO of WD-40, has a constant drive to learn. When he took over as CEO of WD-40, he asked himself, “What do I think I know and what do I have to learn?” Garry realized there was much to learn and therefore enrolled in USD’s first MSEL cohort. How many CEOs decide to go back to school? What tremendous sense of self and lack of ego is required to be able to answer that question when many would consider him to already be at the pinnacle of his career!

It made me wonder when the last time was that I truly asked myself what I thought I knew and what I needed to learn. When I accepted my current position as Executive Director of Innovation and Design, there was a lot to learn. I knew I had to become well versed in Design Thinking. And I quickly realized there were a lot of cultural and pedagogical values in my district that I needed to familiarize myself with, but what did I truly think I knew? And what did I have to learn?

It’s a question I’m still answering, and I think that’s the point. The more I learn, the more I realize I need to learn more. And then the more I learn, the more I realize that what I thought I knew wasn’t fully developed, and therefore there’s still more I need to learn. Not just about pedagogy and Design Thinking, either. About organizational systems. About change management. About culture. About thinking. About people and values. About visions and missions and the work to carry them out. About industry. And careers. And the Fourth Industrial Revolution. About Sinek’s Golden Circle. And the list goes on and on.

But what if I asked students that question? Ask a student what they think they know, and what they need to learn. Most may look at you like you’ve lost your marbles. Or they may tell you about the facts that need to be memorized for an upcoming exam. Or the items missed on a previous test. Or the homework that is waiting for them at home.

But none of that is learning. It’s just playing school.

When classrooms promote student agency, and the personalization of learning that must co-exist with agency, then students can better articulate their learning because they understand both the purpose and the end goal. Perhaps a student would share how s/he is developing a narrative to include more descriptive elements so as to draw the reader in. Or another student may share that s/he is developing a strategy to approach a complex math problem using known algorithms. Another may say that he thinks he knows how to solve a playground situation, but needs to spend more time empathizing with the users to see if the prototype will solve the underlying issue.

In each of these answers, students are owners of their learning journey. The teacher, approaching classroom leadership as a side-by-side relationship, is providing the space and the time so that each student’s learning is nurtured.

That’s what personalization of learning is all about. Every student and teacher being able to ask, “What do I think I know and what do I have to learn?” and being able to answer it, and then travel down the path that not only answers that initial question, but opens up a hundred more.

February 21, 2018
Personalization Isn’t a Fancy Computer Program

Laura presented the idea of “personalization of learning,” meaning more in how does the teacher understand the student, build on their interests, and create learning opportunities for the student. I can get behind this idea.

The personalization of learning creates the opportunity for more depth and authenticity, whereas “personalized learning” seems to be more about knowing the “stuff”. – George Couros

When George Couros mentioned me in his post, “Personalized Learning Vs Personalization,” I was honestly a bit surprised when I started to receive tweets and messages asking for more information, because I just assumed everyone saw it the same way as I did. And then, serendipitously, an article in my inbox called “A Confession and a Question on Personalized Learning” explained the problem with personalized learning, as it is constructed now.

Larry Berger, CEO of Amplify, shared how computerized personalized learning programs are failing to live up to the promise. Not only have they not been able to map out a scope and sequence for learning, they don’t know how to measure truly where students are and what they need, and the library of lessons that are needed to teach students is only about 5% complete. But more important than all that, Berger writes is that:

Just because the algorithms want a kid to learn the next thing doesn’t mean that a real kid actually wants to learn that thing.

So we need to move beyond this engineering model. Once we do, we find that many more compelling and more realistic frontiers of personalized learning opening up.

Which brings me to the question that I hope might kick off your conversation: “What did your best teachers and coaches do for you—without the benefit of maps, algorithms, or data—to personalize your learning?”

In asking the question of what the best teachers and coaches do to personalize learning, we get at the heart of this topic. Personalization is, at its core, about relationships. It’s about knowing your students as unique human beings, and then finding ways to let them explore their sense of self through experiences that are not laid out, step by step, in a neat package by the teacher but rather require the students to find their own way to the finish line.

An example:

Over the past month, third graders at one of our schools have been studying the Kumeyaay Native Americans. An area of focus, placed by the teachers, was on culture and traditions. As the Kumeyaay adapted to outside influences, and disruptions to their way of life, they found ways to preserve their traditions for future generations. As the culmination to this unit, students participated in a weeklong Design Sprint.

Objective: How might we understand the Kumeyaay journey of change over time and their desire to retain cultural customs, so as to better understand how to tell our own story in an ever-evolving time?

To kick off the week, students heard stories from a Kamishibai storyteller. They discussed the elements of storytelling, and participated in an improv activity called “Pass the Gift” to explore how body gestures can be used to convey a story.

From there, we asked students to think about an important tradition in their family. Using a chalk talk thinking routine, students wrote a tradition down on butcher paper. After conducting a gallery walk to see what everyone else wrote, students came up with categories for the different tradition types – topics ranged from dinner with the family to summer vacations to SuperBowl parties.

And then the true personalization happened… students were told to decide on the best method to preserve the story of that tradition. They didn’t have to write an autobiography, with 5 paragraphs and a hook opener. They had to really think about what could not only best capture their story, but what would the user (their family) respond to best. The mediums chosen varied: movies, slideshows, stop-motion animation, painting, sculptures, comic strips, written narratives, and even a few Kamishibai story boxes!

After students finished their projects, they shared them with 6th grade buddies to receive feedback. They’ll adjust the prototypes after break to prepare them for Open House. One teacher commented, after the Design Sprint ended, “The students shared their projects today with their sixth grade buddies and it was truly one of the most powerful moments we have ever witnessed in the classroom.”

Personalization can take many forms. In this case, the artistic medium not only let students express themselves creatively, but it also provided a way for both the introvert and the extrovert, the verbal-linguistic and the logical-mathematical, the second language learner and the gifted child, to connect with the academic standards in a meaningful, relevant way.

** This is the first in a series of posts on Personalization of Learning. Sign up to receive an update when I post. Type your email address in the box and click the “Subscribe” button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

February 16, 2018
Don’t Sit On Grandma’s Couch: Contemplating the Pinterest Classroom
I remember going to my grandparents house often as a child. I loved being there. There was a pool with a slide and a jacuzzi; A pool house with a billiards table. A TV room with an awesome reclining chair (which was my grandpa’s chair, but I could sit in it when he wasn’t at home); and a driveway with an amazing two part hill that was perfect for coasting down while sitting on a skateboard.

But it also had one room that was off-limits to children: the living room. You may recall a similar room in your grandparents (or parents?) house. Perhaps the couch had a plastic cover on it. There were knick knacks everywhere that were not to be touched, moved, or even breathed on. I’m serious…sometimes, just to test her, we’d move an object. Maybe an inch. Maybe just rotate it a few degrees. And before the day was over, it’d be back in its proper placement. On special occasions, we’d take family pictures in that room, near the fireplace. But beyond that, it was definitely off limits.

I’ve been thinking about that room a lot lately. It was part of my grandparents house, and yet it wasn’t part of my experience at their house. It was a museum of sorts. Like a giant curio closet housing my grandma’s vision of the perfect house. I think it embodied what she thought her home should be like, as though she was June Cleaver without the pearls, waiting for the Beaver to come home from school.

The reason I’ve been thinking about that room a lot lately is because I’ve also been thinking a lot about the environment in which students spend most of their awake hours. There’s this movement, it seems, to create classrooms that are Pinterest-worthy: full of bright colors, amazing graphics, beautiful fonts, and coordinated themes. I have to say, I am often in awe when I see these classrooms on my Instagram feed because I can only imagine the hours and dollars invested in created them. They’re just, so, perfect-looking.

And that’s the problem. Much like the plastic covered couch, many of these rooms seem to echo the desire of adults more than the students. For example, there are displays of student work perfectly-spaced apart on a wall, often with a background border that echoes the topic of the writing displayed. At first glance, it’s impressive to see every child’s writing or art or science essay showcased. But then it hit me… who are these products displayed for? Not for the students in the class. Often times, the displays are high on the wall, out of reach of students, both of their eyes and their hands.

Environment is one of the eight components in developing a culture of thinking. Environment is where learners discuss their thinking, share ideas, debate viewpoints, and engage with other learners (Ritchhart, Church, Morrison 244). In a student-centered classroom environment, the emphasis should be on process, not product, to reflect the iterative nature of learning, and the growth mindset deeper learning requires. There should be evidence of thinking, of learning, of struggling with concepts and new ideas and making meaningful connections. This process is often messy and non-linear, and reflective of student choice and agency and the individualized pace of learning. Ron Ritchhart’s The Development of a Culture of Thinking in My Classroom: Self-Assessment provides a starting place for teachers assessing how they are developing a culture of thinking in their classroom. For the physical environment, Ritchhart includes:
- Displays in the room inspire learning in the subject area and connect students to the larger world of ideas by displaying positive messages about learning and thinking.
- I arrange the space of my classroom to facilitate thoughtful interactions, collaborations, and discussion.
- My wall displays have an ongoing, inchoate, and/or dialogic nature to them versus only static display of finished work.
- I use a variety of ways to document and capture thinking, including technology.
- A visitor would be able to discern what I care about and value when it comes to learning.
Erin Klein, an award-winning teacher and blogger, believes that teachers should “observe students in their natural habitat and work to accommodate their needs” (webinar). This approach, which values student voice and agency, should also consider brain research around visual environment and attention spans. “Young children with immature regulation of focused attention are often placed in elementary-school classrooms containing many displays that are not relevant to ongoing instruction.” The research showed that “children were more distracted by the visual environment, spent more time off task, and demonstrated smaller learning gains when the walls were highly decorated than when the decorations were removed.”

So if a classroom were designed with a focus on student needs, how might student work be displayed? Would they be placed lower so that students could check out the pieces of their peers? Perhaps there would be Post-Its nearby so that students could leave feedback on pieces they enjoyed, or provide suggestions for the next revision. How about opportunities for students to self-select the piece posted, with a note asking for the type of feedback the student is seeking?

I don’t often see these types of experiential opportunities in photos of the Pinterest-worthy classrooms. Just like I don’t see photos of any of us sitting on grandma’s couch.

Sign up to receive an update when I post. Type your email address in the box and click the “Subscribe” button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.
February 2, 2018