Shared Commitment to Success
Shared Commitment to Success Practitioner utilizes students as a key resource in the learning process.
Key Method The practitioner and students use conferring, learner profiles, and other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners and in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Method Components When educators and learners see students as key resources in their own learning and appreciate the interdependence between the educator and learner roles, they develop a shared commitment to success: learners see educators as their best advocates, educators understand that they won’t succeed unless their learners do, and both parties are less likely to blame the other for problems that may arise during the learning process. Changing Relationships Between Practitioner and Learners While legacy learning environments typically depend on student compliance to ensure order and completion of assigned work, personalized learning environments focus on stimulating and nurturing a commitment to learning as the key driver for learning engagement and growth. Rather than focusing on the problems to solve or how long an assignment should be, learner questions in a personalized learning environment are more likely to center on understanding and mastery as drivers of learning effort. §
Legacy Model In a legacy model, educators transfer their knowledge to learners as dictated by standards and the curriculum, regardless of individual readiness. Under this model, if formative assessments show that students aren’t learning what’s been taught, teachers must do what they can to re-teach aspects of their lessons while pushing ahead at a predetermined pace, ultimately administering a summative assessment, assigning grades, and moving on whether all learners are ready to or not. Learning is often considered to be primarily the student’s responsibility rather than a direct reflection of the educator’s skills, approach, efforts, and partnership with the learner.
§
Personalized Model In a personalized learning model, the learner-educator relationship shifts. In this model, educators and learners work together to determine the order, pace, and assessment of learning in order to meet the dictates of the standards and curriculum. Here the assumption is that teachers can only be successful if their students are. Consequently, they are positioned to be strong advocates for student learning rather than serving primarily as planners, presenters, and assessors.
Shifts some learners will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § Skilled students à Skilled life-long learners § Minimal input into their educational path à Co-creating their educational path § Compliant listeners à Committed learners § “Delivered” instruction à Shared responsibility for instruction § Summative assessments based on questions à Summative assessments that demonstrate mastery Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
Shifts some educators will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § Planning lessons à Designers of learning § Sole content providers à Curators of learning resources and experiences § Judge and documenter à Advocate, coach, and learning partner § Adherence to best practice à Engagement with effective practices § Teaching as telling à Instruction as diagnosis, flexibility, and nurturing of learning Shifts some administrators will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § § § §
Demand compliance à Build commitment Skepticism à Lead with trust Focus on problems à Be alert for opportunities Focus on performance and practices of adults à Focus on the experiences of the learners
Administrators will also: § Lead with “why,” be clear about “what,” and stay flexible about “how” § Create urgency, build awareness, and support innovation
Supporting Research §
Wisconsin’s Guiding Principles for Teaching and Learning http://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/cal/pdf/guiding-principles4.pdf
§
Principle 4: Learning is a Collaborative Responsibility http://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/cal/pdf/guiding-principles4.pdf
Resources §
Student Commitment Depends on Teacher Commitment http://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-commitment-depends-on-teachers-ben-johnson
§
Student-Teacher Relationships: Classroom Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEI6zHI0KLg&feature=youtu.be
Submission Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria The items in the following section detail what must be submitted for evaluation. To earn the micro-credential, you must receive a passing evaluation for Parts 1, 3, and 4, and a “Yes” for Part 2. Part 1. Overview Questions (200-word limit) §
Process: Describe the process you went through to move toward a focus on the practitioners’ and students’ commitment to success. - Passing: Response includes intentional planning in developing students’ understanding of their role and the educator’s role in the learning experience; and evidence of purposeful learning, tapping the students’ interests and passions, and allowing the student voice regarding learning strategies and rate of learning.
Part 2. Work Examples/Artifacts Submit an artifact that demonstrates how you use conferring, learner profiles, and other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners and in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience. Artifact can be written (200-word limit), recorded (two to three minutes), and student examples, etc. Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
2
“Yes”
“Not Yet”
Artifact includes information on how practitioner used conferring, learner profiles, or other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners.
Artifact did not include information on how practitioner used conferring, learner profiles, or other studentcentered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners.
Artifact demonstrates how practitioner used this information in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Artifact did not demonstrate how practitioner used this information in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Part 3. Student Reflection Submit a reflection from a student on how they demonstrate a shared commitment to success by utilizing self-reflection and feedback from practitioners and peers to guide their learning path. Student reflection can be a recording or written (200-word limit): - Passing: Reflection clearly discusses how the student utilizes self-reflection and feedback from practitioners and peers to guide their learning path. Part 4. Practitioner Reflection Provide a written reflection on at least two of the following (500-word limit): § What was successful about developing a “shared commitment to success” with your students? What were some challenges you faced? § What are four or five learner “look fors” you would expect to see reflected in a learning environment because of a shared commitment to success? § What was the role of the learner in developing a “shared commitment to success”? What was your role (i.e., the role of the educator) in utilizing a “shared commitment to success”? § What are the connections between students’ beliefs and attitudes and learning success? § How do you see the continuous development of an understanding about a “shared commitment to success” impacting learning? - Passing: Reflection clearly discusses at least two of the following: success and challenges, four or five learner look-fors, the role of the learners and the educator, and plans for refining the shared commitment to success.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
3
Key Method The practitioner and students use conferring, learner profiles, and other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners and in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Method Components When educators and learners see students as key resources in their own learning and appreciate the interdependence between the educator and learner roles, they develop a shared commitment to success: learners see educators as their best advocates, educators understand that they won’t succeed unless their learners do, and both parties are less likely to blame the other for problems that may arise during the learning process. Changing Relationships Between Practitioner and Learners While legacy learning environments typically depend on student compliance to ensure order and completion of assigned work, personalized learning environments focus on stimulating and nurturing a commitment to learning as the key driver for learning engagement and growth. Rather than focusing on the problems to solve or how long an assignment should be, learner questions in a personalized learning environment are more likely to center on understanding and mastery as drivers of learning effort. §
Legacy Model In a legacy model, educators transfer their knowledge to learners as dictated by standards and the curriculum, regardless of individual readiness. Under this model, if formative assessments show that students aren’t learning what’s been taught, teachers must do what they can to re-teach aspects of their lessons while pushing ahead at a predetermined pace, ultimately administering a summative assessment, assigning grades, and moving on whether all learners are ready to or not. Learning is often considered to be primarily the student’s responsibility rather than a direct reflection of the educator’s skills, approach, efforts, and partnership with the learner.
§
Personalized Model In a personalized learning model, the learner-educator relationship shifts. In this model, educators and learners work together to determine the order, pace, and assessment of learning in order to meet the dictates of the standards and curriculum. Here the assumption is that teachers can only be successful if their students are. Consequently, they are positioned to be strong advocates for student learning rather than serving primarily as planners, presenters, and assessors.
Shifts some learners will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § Skilled students à Skilled life-long learners § Minimal input into their educational path à Co-creating their educational path § Compliant listeners à Committed learners § “Delivered” instruction à Shared responsibility for instruction § Summative assessments based on questions à Summative assessments that demonstrate mastery Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
Shifts some educators will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § Planning lessons à Designers of learning § Sole content providers à Curators of learning resources and experiences § Judge and documenter à Advocate, coach, and learning partner § Adherence to best practice à Engagement with effective practices § Teaching as telling à Instruction as diagnosis, flexibility, and nurturing of learning Shifts some administrators will encounter when implementing the honeycomb model: § § § §
Demand compliance à Build commitment Skepticism à Lead with trust Focus on problems à Be alert for opportunities Focus on performance and practices of adults à Focus on the experiences of the learners
Administrators will also: § Lead with “why,” be clear about “what,” and stay flexible about “how” § Create urgency, build awareness, and support innovation
Supporting Research §
Wisconsin’s Guiding Principles for Teaching and Learning http://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/cal/pdf/guiding-principles4.pdf
§
Principle 4: Learning is a Collaborative Responsibility http://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/cal/pdf/guiding-principles4.pdf
Resources §
Student Commitment Depends on Teacher Commitment http://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-commitment-depends-on-teachers-ben-johnson
§
Student-Teacher Relationships: Classroom Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEI6zHI0KLg&feature=youtu.be
Submission Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria The items in the following section detail what must be submitted for evaluation. To earn the micro-credential, you must receive a passing evaluation for Parts 1, 3, and 4, and a “Yes” for Part 2. Part 1. Overview Questions (200-word limit) §
Process: Describe the process you went through to move toward a focus on the practitioners’ and students’ commitment to success. - Passing: Response includes intentional planning in developing students’ understanding of their role and the educator’s role in the learning experience; and evidence of purposeful learning, tapping the students’ interests and passions, and allowing the student voice regarding learning strategies and rate of learning.
Part 2. Work Examples/Artifacts Submit an artifact that demonstrates how you use conferring, learner profiles, and other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners and in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience. Artifact can be written (200-word limit), recorded (two to three minutes), and student examples, etc. Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
2
“Yes”
“Not Yet”
Artifact includes information on how practitioner used conferring, learner profiles, or other student-centered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners.
Artifact did not include information on how practitioner used conferring, learner profiles, or other studentcentered methods to support students’ understanding of themselves as learners.
Artifact demonstrates how practitioner used this information in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Artifact did not demonstrate how practitioner used this information in developing learning paths throughout the learning experience.
Part 3. Student Reflection Submit a reflection from a student on how they demonstrate a shared commitment to success by utilizing self-reflection and feedback from practitioners and peers to guide their learning path. Student reflection can be a recording or written (200-word limit): - Passing: Reflection clearly discusses how the student utilizes self-reflection and feedback from practitioners and peers to guide their learning path. Part 4. Practitioner Reflection Provide a written reflection on at least two of the following (500-word limit): § What was successful about developing a “shared commitment to success” with your students? What were some challenges you faced? § What are four or five learner “look fors” you would expect to see reflected in a learning environment because of a shared commitment to success? § What was the role of the learner in developing a “shared commitment to success”? What was your role (i.e., the role of the educator) in utilizing a “shared commitment to success”? § What are the connections between students’ beliefs and attitudes and learning success? § How do you see the continuous development of an understanding about a “shared commitment to success” impacting learning? - Passing: Reflection clearly discusses at least two of the following: success and challenges, four or five learner look-fors, the role of the learners and the educator, and plans for refining the shared commitment to success.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
3
