Many times we are faced with what is clearly a problem<\/strong>, but we fail to find solutions<\/strong>. It often results from a failure to ask the right questions. As often happens, we confuse the metric with the causes of the problem.<\/p>\n The United States annually administers the National Assessment of Educational Progress<\/a> (NAEP). It is nicknamed the nation’s report card<\/strong>. It assesses what students know and can do in critical subject areas. The Christian Science Monitor recently released\u00a0the\u00a0results and analysis for the 2013 NAEP report card<\/a>. Below are two selected quotes:<\/p>\n A full 25 percent of 12th-graders in 2013 scored below basic, compared with 20 percent in 1992, and just 37 percent scored at or above proficient<\/strong>, compared with 40 percent in 1992. Those scoring at the proficient level could answer questions requiring them to recognize the paraphrase of an idea<\/strong> from a historical speech and the interpretation<\/strong> of a paragraph in such a speech.<\/span><\/p>\n Scoring well on NAEP was strongly correlated with students who reported that reading is<\/strong> \u201cenjoyable<\/strong>,\u201d said they \u201clearn a lot<\/strong>\u201d when they read, and said they regularly discuss what they read in class<\/strong>.<\/span> [emphasis added]<\/p>\n The\u00a0first paragraph\u00a0clearly represents an educational\u00a0problem.\u00a0The second paragraph\u00a0indicates\u00a0a possible path to a solution.\u00a0It is natural to ask, what are the root cause?\u00a0What is going on here in these classrooms with these students? It might be the underlying instructional practice, it might be\u00a0educational funding, it might be too much television and media\u00a0consumption at the expense of\u00a0reading, or it might be the result of shifting cultural-economic patterns in society. I am sure other options could be hypothesized as well.<\/p>\n Let’s concentrate on one problem\u00a0reported in the\u00a0findings: students have difficulty recognizing the paraphrase<\/strong> of an idea from a longer text. Instead of “paraphrase” we could easily substitute other words such as summary, main idea or gist. The natural question to ask is, what is the cause<\/strong> of this inability to synthesize knowledge into a paraphrase?<\/p>\n Then we can ask, how do we fix it? What is the solution<\/strong>? The key may lie in the second quote: scores of proficient and above were associated with enjoyment and value placed by students on reading. Just as importantly, they regularly discuss what they read in class. Teachers often do not have the luxury of extended analysis; Monday is around the corner.<\/p>\n On the road from problem to solution, there are some pitfalls.<\/p>\n In first looking at\u00a0the\u00a0Nation’s Report Card\u00a0summary<\/a>, I must admit that it is easy to get overwhelmed. I decided to focus more on reading<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0since it is a core skill. I have been a Reading Specialist and a high school English teacher during my career, so I have a natural interest in language and reading. In the elementary grades I found that teaching main idea<\/strong> was extremely challenging. It was no less so in high school. Why? I have learned that it does not exist as a discrete skill, but it is a set of thinking skills that are highly influenced by context.<\/p>\n The light went on for me as I thought about this.\u00a0Main\u00a0idea – or summary –\u00a0was an analogue to Noam Chomsky’s theory of transformational grammar<\/strong><\/a>. (Don’t run! Let me explain – briefly!) I read Chomsky in my studies as a reading specialist. He was a linguist who posited that there was a deep structure<\/strong> to all grammatical structures within our brains. It reflected it self in multiple ways as part of the surface grammar – which always seemed to be in flux. That is why trying to teach grammar has been such a bear of a task.<\/p>\n When I taught\u00a0English Language Learners in what were then called ESL classes,\u00a0I learned that students acquired<\/strong> language. Through multiple variations in context and comprehensible input, they started to master the underlying grammar. In the same way, students learn to summarize or grasp the gist of passages through discussions of what the gist is. You might call this collaborative summarizing.\u00a0In educational psychology\u00a0one might call it the\u00a0social construction of knowledge<\/a>.<\/p>\n I had the opportunity to film some instructional practices in the classroom that offer instructional strategies that target the ability to summarize<\/strong>. It is not an innate ability. Rather it is a learned set of skills that require clear instruction, time and repeated practice. I learned a great deal as I filmed collaborative summarizing<\/strong> – in a third grade classroom and in a\u00a07th grade\u00a0classroom. The methods could easily be applied to high school.\u00a0They are posted on YouTube; see below.<\/p>\nThe Nation’s Report Card<\/h2>\n
Problem<\/h2>\n
Pitfalls<\/h2>\n
\n
\nUnfortunately, once we think we have found or named a cause, we often look for someone to blame. This type of “accountability” finds\u00a0much of its strength in sanctions and punitive responses. It finds it strength in fear. Blame is so unproductive, and it\u00a0rarely leads to\u00a0a solution.<\/li>\n
\nOk. Let’s think about this. Then let’s think some more. Too much analysis can lead to a failure to try to solve the problem. Sometimes empiricism<\/a> is the best method for exploring solutions to complex problems: hypothesize, try something, observe results and then evaluate. Repeat.<\/li>\n
\nTeachers often do not have the luxury of extended analysis: someday someone will find an answer. However, on Monday\u00a0all those students will show up in your classroom. The Someday\/Monday dichotomy<\/a> captures one of the core challenges in teacher professional development around education technology, but it also applies to general instructional strategies as well.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nSolution<\/h2>\n
\n