appendix 3 curriculum, instruction, and assessment: rigor and relevance The old adage of learning best by experience is really true. Research confirms that more learning occurs when students are immersed in a rich, stimulating environment. Learning that involves a physical component, such as writing or design and construction, results in greater brain activity than simply listening or viewing. To be effective, education must create these types of stimulating learning experiences. Application also improves learning. William Glasser s research findings in communication and learning reinforces what we all know innately learners retain information better when they actually use or apply it. Students retain 75 percent or more of what they experience through application. New information presented only through lecture results in a retention rate of 5 percent. Reading can increase that rate to 10 percent. Adding audiovisual material results in a 20 percent retention rate. Figure A3.1 Learning Activity Retention Appendix 3: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Relevance and Retention 159
Unfortunately, students in U.S. classrooms have limited exposure to application. Other nations equate application with high-level learning and frequently incorporate real-world problems into instruction. Stevenson and Stigler point to analysis of classroom instruction that reveal that only 16 percent of instruction in a sample of U.S. classrooms could be characterized as application. In contrast, instruction in Taiwan and Japan was 62 percent and 82 percent application, respectively. Citing a large body of research, ICLE asserts the following: Knowledge is best acquired when taught in context Increased achievement results from focusing on students interests and aptitudes Meta-cognition is essential for continued learning High expectations correlate with achievement ICLE s Rigor/Relevance Framework The Rigor/Relevance Framework is based on two dimensions of higher standards and student achievement: A continuum of knowledge that describes the increasingly complex ways in which learners think (Bloom s Knowledge Taxonomy). An action continuum, known as the Application Model. The Knowledge Taxonomy is based on the six levels of Bloom s Taxonomy: (1) awareness/ knowledge, (2) comprehension, (3) application, (4) analysis, (5) synthesis, and (6) evaluation. The low end of this continuum involves acquiring knowledge and being able to recall or locate that knowledge in a simple manner. The high end of the Knowledge Taxonomy labels more complex ways in which individuals use knowledge. At this level knowledge is fully integrated into one s mind, and individuals can do much more than locate information. They can take several pieces of knowledge and combine them in both logical and creative ways. Assimilation of knowledge is a good way to describe this high level of the thinking continuum. Assimilation is often referred to as a higher-order thinking skills; at this level, the student can solve multi-step problems and create unique work and solutions. A look at how these various levels can be applied in classroom activities related to basic nutrition may help the reader visualize. Figure A3.2 160 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement
The second continuum, the Application Model, is one of action. The five levels of this continuum describe putting knowledge to use: knowledge in one discipline apply in discipline apply across disciplines apply to real-world predictable situations apply to real-world unpredictable situations. While the low end of the continuum is knowledge acquired for its own sake, the high end signifies action use of that knowledge to solve complex real-world problems and to create projects, designs, and other works for use in real-world situations. Figure a3.3 Appendix 3: CurriCulum, instruction And Assessment: relevance And retention 161
The Rigor/Relevance Framework has four quadrants. Quadrant A represents simple recall and basic understanding of knowledge for its own sake. Quadrant C represents more complex thinking but still knowledge for its own sake. Examples of Quadrant A knowledge are knowing that the world is round and that Shakespeare wrote Hamlet. Quadrant C embraces higher levels of knowledge, such as knowing how the U.S. political system works and analyzing the benefits and challenges of the cultural diversity of this nation versus other nations. Quadrants B and D represent action or high degrees of application. Quadrant B would include knowing how to use math skills to make purchases and count change. The ability to access information in wide-area network systems and the ability to gather knowledge from a variety of sources to solve a complex problem in the workplace are types of Quadrant D knowledge. Each of these four quadrants can also be labeled with a term that characterizes the learning or student performance. Quadrant A Acquisition Students gather and store bits of knowledge and information. Students are primarily expected to remember or understand this acquired knowledge. Quadrant B Application Students use acquired knowledge to solve problems, design solutions, and complete work. The highest level of application is to apply appropriate knowledge to new and unpredictable situations. Quadrant C Assimilation Students extend and refine their acquired knowledge to be able to use that knowledge automatically and routinely to analyze and solve problems and create unique solutions. Quadrant D Adaptation Students have the competence to think in complex ways and also apply knowledge and skills they have acquired. Even when confronted with perplexing unknowns, students are able to use extensive knowledge and skill to create solutions and take action that further develops their skills and knowledge. Quadrant A Acquisition: Experiences focus on recall or discovery of basic knowledge. Quadrant B Application: Activities provide definite opportunities for students to apply knowledge, typically to real-world problem. Quadrant C Assimilation: Activities are often complex and require students to often come up with solutions that lead to deeper understanding of concepts and knowledge. Quadrant D Adaptation: Learning experiences are high in rigor and relevance and require unique solutions to unpredictable problems. 162 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement
But how can a teacher or educational leader evaluate where a specific lesson, task, application, assessment or activity falls within this continuum. ICLE developed the Knowledge Taxonomy Verb List and Application Model Decision Tree [insert below] to help analyze the material and describe or revise desired performance objectives. The Verb List mirrors the knowledge levels. The Decision Tree focuses on the three characteristics that distinguish levels of the Application Model: application, real world, and unpredictability. Figure A3.4 Appendix 3: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Relevance and Retention 163
Figure A3.5 164 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement
Appendix 3: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Relevance and Retention 165
Why is this Useful? One of the principles of effective learning is congruence among curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Make sure that the levels of rigor and relevance are consistent throughout a lesson. For example, if a teacher has lofty curriculum objectives in Quadrant D high rigor/high relevance but develops instruction and assessments in Quadrant A low rigor/low relevance, students would be unlikely to achieve those high expectations. Similarly, if a teacher creates high-rigor instructional activities but uses a low-rigor assessment, the test would not be an accurate indication of what students learned. Use the Application Model Decision Tree to draft, examine and modify curriculum objectives, instructional activities or assessments to get them to the desired level. One of the ways to think about the Rigor/Relevance Framework in day-to-day instruction is in terms of the roles that teachers and students take. Figure A3.6 When instruction and expected student learning is in Quadrant A, the focus is on teacher work. Teachers expend energy to create and assess learning activities providing information, creating worksheets, and grading student work. The student is often the passive learner. When the student expectation moves to Quadrant B, the emphasis is on the student doing real-world work. This student work is often more complicated than Quadrant A work and requires more time. Learning in Quadrant B is best described as student work because students are doing extensive real-world tasks. When the learning is placed in Quadrant C, it is best described as student think. In this Quadrant, students are expected to think in complex ways to analyze, compare, create and evaluate. The term that best describes Quadrant D activities is student think and work. Learning Quadrant D is more demanding. Roles shift from the teacher-centered instruction in Quadrant A to student-centered instruction in Quadrants B, C, and D. 166 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement
What it Looks Like in Practice The charts on the following pages provide examples at the elementary, middle level and high school to help teachers and school leaders distinguish the types of activities that would be called for in the various quadrants. Figure A3.7 Appendix 3: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Relevance and Retention 167
Figure A3.8 168 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement
Figure A3.9 The ICLE Rigor/Relevance Framework provides an excellent starting point for your team to begin a thorough look at ensuring that the curriculum is rigorous and relevant, that the instruction and activities are designed to move students beyond acquisition of facts and that the assessment tools are aligned with higher order skills and knowledge. Clearly this overview can only provide a starting point for your thinking and discussions around improving student learning. Appendix 3: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Relevance and Retention 169
Is Instruction Engaging? As the principal or a member of the leadership team, you are responsible for gathering and analyzing information about the instructional practices in your school and their overall effectiveness. Is it feasible to develop a schoolwide picture of student learning that can serve as the basis for faculty reflection, instructional change, and school improvement? More specifically, How do you collect data that will be accepted by faculty as a fair and accurate representation of student learning throughout the school? How do you depict those data in a simple, meaningful format for analysis? How do you engage all faculty members in study and reflection about the data that will lead to improved instructional practices throughout the school? How do you use the data to document enhanced learning experiences for all students? Note: All material in Appendix 3 was provided by ICLE, except as noted, and reprinted with permission. 170 Breaking Ranks: The Comprehensive Framework for School Improvement