The Eternal Essence of a Growth Mindset

I am a bit of a regular in the TED-Ed Community and have met a number of exceptionally brilliant people through that space.  One of these people is Steven Sutantro.  He wrote a post called The Key of Growth Mindset: Learn, Unlearn, Relearn that made an impact because I keep thinking about it in application to my professional growth.

Until recently, my guiding idea in professional practice was the Teaching and Learning Cycle.  Now, I have replaced that cycle in my mind with one more reflective of a growth mindset.  I envision taking the cycle and bending it over into the infinity symbol.  The unlearning is the bridge between learning and relearning.  

The teaching profession is infamous in saying,  "This <fill in the blank>  is just like <fill in the blank> that we used to do.'  However, there is great value in the subtle twist of a nuance. Sometimes, the subtle twist moves one from encountering an idea to understanding that idea.  And sometimes, it is not a twist  Sometimes, it is a complete transformation away from an original guiding idea or practice.

I've crossed the unlearning bridge a number of times lately.  Here is one example.

Learn

When I began teaching, all obvious signs of reading trouble in the intermediate grades was comprehension.  The programs I had to work with zeroed in on comprehension strategies. The assessments I gave in the intermediate grades focused on comprehension. The curriculum (pre NCLB), and then the standards (post NCLB), pointed to comprehension.  The data gathered from the assessments pointed to issues of comprehension.  With all of the evidence pointing me to comprehension, I focused on comprehension in the classroom.

Unlearn

After meeting Brenda Erickson, a Montessori veteran, I began to focus on foundational reading skills.   I unlearned my assumption that students needed the name of a letter first when beginning literacy (through the Souns program) and this unlearning led to unlearning comprehension was the only culprit for reading troubles in the intermediate grades. 

If I could only go back in time...  

Relearn

I cannot go back but I can go forward. I relearned the intricate connections of reading, writing, listening and speaking bound together by sounds. After teaching my children in a Montessori-minded way, I realized how my children demonstrated stronger phonemic awareness than many of the 3rd, 4th and 5th students I taught. While I cannot return to students of the past, I can do something for students today.  I check letter sound knowledge of older children and then I listen to them read and notate my observations on a running record.  I relearned a focus for reading instruction for students who were struggling simply by looking for missing pieces in the foundation, the alphabetic principle, and it has made a difference for many struggling readers I have encountered.

Unlearning requires pride swallowing but it is the pathway to professional growth.  It challenges the ego who realizes that a past practice (or even a publication) may be flawed or incorrect.  Once one accepts past mistakes, or misguided practices, as necessary for growth and overcomes the stubborn ego, a significant new level of learning can begin.

Have you crossed the unlearning bridge in your professional practice? 

How can we transition a system through the unlearning bridge?

Share your ideas with the TED-Ed Community! 

Sutantro, S. (2014). The key of growth mindset: learn, unlearn, relearn. Eductechpost Retrieved from http://edutechpost.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/the-key-of-growth-mindset-learnunlearn-relearn/

Identity

While taking a walk with my friend last week, we chatted about a related problem plaguing our fields.  My friend is a director of a house that is a transitional stay between prison and society.  Her heart is with justice. Mine is in education.  She mentioned how performance-based funding has taken over. I mentioned the same thinking of accountability and performance-based funding is found in No Child Left Behind legislation.  

When TED shared in its Facebook feed Bryan Stevenson's talk, I saw the intricacy of the connection. When I sent it my friend's way, she did, too. We hit the tragic dichotomy in education similar to one eloquently described happening in our justice system.  The system thinking of performance outcomes is at odds with an individual's identity. 

Sometimes what is best for a system is not what is best for the individual. 

And sometimes what is best for the individual defies what is best for the system.

Please watch Bryan Stevenson's TED Talk: 

"We need to talk about an injustice."

If a standard applies to a learning mind, there are no exceptions.  

Every child’s mind is exceptional. 

Therefore, standards do not apply universally to learning.

  How to Change the Future

Hargis, A. (2013). How to change the future. Montessori Mischief. Retrieved from http://montessorimischief.com/how-to-change-the-future/

Stevenson, B. (2012) We need to talk about an injustice.  TED Talks. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/bryan_stevenson_we_need_to_talk_about_an_injustice#

Make Standards Work in Public Education

"Standards can create learning environments. Standards cannot create learners," synthesized my mentor Brenda Erickson after listening to me ramble on and on about trouble with standards-based reform.

Education is not like other industries.  In public schools, education is a system servicing individual learners.  Often, what is best for the system is not what is best for the learner.  And, what is best for the learner is not always what is best for the system. 

Learning is complex, and the public education system is complicated!

Standards are of industry.

Standards work for environments.  Let's apply standards to ensure equitable learning environments for all children.

In the United States' public schools, standards could regulate healthy lunches.  Kudos, First Lady Michelle Obama, for taking on this important issue.  Brains work best with healthy food and the standard bar can establish minimal expectations for fresh fruits and vegetables.

In the United States' public schools, standards could facilitate equitable building conditions.  Is asbestos present?  Is the water in the water fountains safe?  Does the roof leak? Is there air conditioning and/or adequate heating?  Standards could regulate such inequities.  

In the United States' public schools, standards could create reasonable class sizes.  The standard bar could establish a minimal expectation for class-size capacity. 

In the United States' public schools, standards could provide access to technology for students. The standard bar could establish minimal expectations for technology in a building.

In the United States' public schools, standards could create time expectations for movement or exercise.  Brains need exercise to work best.  The standard bar could establish a minimal amount of time spent each day moving. 

In the United States' public schools, standards could create expectations for a robust library and certified librarian.  The standard bar understands numbers.  Flood schools with interesting books.  

In the United States' public schools, standards could define a reasonable range of per pupil expenditures.  The standard bar could establish a range of spending per pupil for equity purposes.

In 2001, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was reauthorized as No Child Left Behind and took effect in 2002.  NCLB applied standards as the measure of student achievement.

Standards are not of intellect.

In the United States' public schools, standards cannot measure learning.  Standards sort learning using a proficiency bar. Brains are far too complex for learning to be reflected or evaluated using such a bar. Standards are regulatory measures of what should be in the mind of a child and simply do not apply to a learning brain.  

Learning is not an industrial process. Learning is complex, and learning is organic. Learning is so organic that it occurs in the a vital organ, the brain. Brains cannot be regulated by government laws.  

I challenge standards-based reform as standards do not work with learning.

If you do not accept the logic of the standard bar, take a look at some data. Mark Dynarski graphed the stop of some improvement closing the achievement gap.  This link displays Inequality and National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Score Gaps from the Brown Center's Chalkboard.  Before NCLB, progress was happening and progress halted after No Child Left Behind. Standards-based reform has not worked because standards do not work with learning!

Standards are currently law.  Standards are law because of No Child Left Behind.  Please take time to read the purpose found on page 15 of the No Child Left Behind Act.  Standards are holding students accountable, teachers accountable, schools accountable and districts accountable.  Soon, standards will hold states accountable. The problem with all of this is standards do not work to measure learning!

Standards need to be removed from measuring learning.  They do not work with learning.

If you are confused, I totally understand.  It has taken me twelve years to sort this out.  Read more about the difference between Curriculum and Standards.  I have gone all over the place wrestling standards and their place with learning.  I've debated in my mind and with other educators.  I treasure literacy and numeracy and know the importance of these basic skills. In fact, as I have been writing, my daughter who just finished first grade just asked, "Is seventeen times five eighty five?"  I had to pause to figure out if she was right. Kids are so much more able than we expect.  We are on the wrong road and I have high expectations for our system to turn this around.  Learning is nurtured, grown, connected and cultivated. Learning is not a product enabled by government regulation.

We need to start with the learner and rethink how we have applied standards to education. What do you think?  What could standards measure in public schools? 

References 

Dynarski, M. (2014). Inequality and NAEP score gaps. The Brown Center Chalkboard. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brown-center-chalkboard/posts/2014/04/30-naep-score-gaps-dynarski?rssid=brown+center+chalkboard&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Brookingsrss%2Ftopfeeds%2Fbrown_center_chalkboard+%28Brookings%3A+Brown+Center+Chalkboard%29 

No Child Left Behind (2002). PUBLIC LAW 107–110—JAN. 8, 2002 115 STAT. 1425. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf