Some of us are old enough to remember a time when there were no “rubrics” for teaching. Teachers learned how to teach in their teacher preparation programs and as student teachers; they struggled the first year or two, and if they were lucky, an older teacher helped them get better. And then they were good teachers, able to manage the class, deal with discipline issues, and lead their students to whatever they were teaching.
But these days, there is a formula for almost everything (except what matters most, like living a good life, coping with adversity, managing the stresses and strains of a culture that bombards us with more information and sensation than we can handle).
In teaching, there is the rubric created by Charlotte Danielson.
Katie Lapham, who teaches in the New York City public schools, thinks back to what inspired her when she was a student in Atlanta. Her teacher never heard of the Danielson rubric or the Marzano method. Yet he was the one who changed her life.
After seeing Michael Elliott’s wonderful film about the drama teachers who changed his life, Katie wrote:
While these lifelong teachers, now retired, had different teaching styles, interests and personalities, they all taught with passion and instinct, traits not measurable by a rubric. They also had freedom and autonomy, conditions that motivate teachers and boost their morale. The current path that we are on – the standardization of teaching and learning and the narrowing of curriculum – is short-sighted and unsustainable. It unfortunately deprives students of experiences that Michael Elliot touchingly describes in his short film. Eileen Daniel Riddle, James Gilchrist and Dr. Rick Chase are teachers who not only inspired students to expand their learning but also created spaces in which students could feel alive.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
To answer your question can one teach without rubrics – yes, of course. The problem is that there are many teachers that don’t teach like Dr. Chase or the teachers mentioned here. So what do we do with those?
Should we necessarily do anything “with those”?
Every teacher should be “great”, eh!! Whatever the hell that means. The usage (in this case unstated) of superlatives leaves all the rest, the “detritus” as less than desirable. What I hear you saying jlsteach is that unless one is in the superlative category, well, to the gulag with them. Is that what you are trying to say without saying it??? Are you the one to be the “decider”?? What makes you the “expert” (again another superlative descriptor) in that case??
I have come across this “superlative” attitude many times (especially displayed by adminimals, self congratulating beasts that they are) and find it to be a fine snobbery. Only the “best” for ME. If asked what the “best” is, it usually amounts to the more expensive option of choices.
The hubris, chutzpah and pompous self-importance of those who are supposed experts leaves much to be desired.
I was never an artist but loved art. A 6th grade art teacher made art relatable. I remember him 50 years later and he changed my heart with a love of color and form. He made his students successful to believe they could. How does a rubric measure that? I paint to this day. I became a nurse later in school because he helped me to believe I could do anything. Not a rubric. Not a script to follow. He was a natural teacher. He knew how to turn on the success inside each student.
No Duane I am not saying that at all. As in any profession – there are some that are amazing, a majority that are in the middle, and some that are not strong. The issue with education is that, from my own experiences in public school, that there are more that are not as strong (but may be rated as in the middle or even higher). No, I am not the decider. But having a tool such as a rubric provides guidelines for teaching…and provides some objectivity. Should we just leave the decision in the hands of individuals who can abuse their power?
“The current path that we are on – the standardization of teaching and learning and the narrowing of curriculum – is short-sighted and unsustainable”
Katie states it perfectly.
We are destroying our future and we are abandoning the diversity that has sustained and nurtured our nation. When we abandon our diversity our nation will fall into a dark abyss that may be impossible to climb out of.
I fear slide into the abyss has begun.. ie Trump, Tea party, Campbell Brown, Palin, Cuomo, Elia, Duncan, King
I think it was in the late 1980s or early 1990s that I was sent to a summer workshop to learn all about rubrics — the next great magic breakthrough promise based on no validated evidence that would propel teachers to the next level and their students to great success in life.
The next school year, I took that rubric from the teacher workshop with language and vocabulary way above most of my students literacy level and I turned what I learned in that rubric workshop for teachers into a lesson for my students and then working together we turned that useless and time consuming rubric for teachers into a rubric the students could use in groups that met to read student essays and rank them according to a rubric the students created.
Every essay a student wrote in my classes was read by an entire class of their peers using that student generated rubric that students could understand. After every reading, each student group of three to five students worked together to fill out the rubric that was stapled to the essay. Then the essays were rotated to another group and the process repeated. There was also a comment section following the rubric and each group was taught how to be constructively critical and make suggestions for improvement. Each group of students would decide what the best constructive comment could be to help a student improve their essay and then the captain of the group would write that down on the Rubric’s comment section. I taught them the difference between being destructive comments and constructive ones and said destructive comments were not allowed. We were there to help each other learn and not tear each other down like these high stakes tests that rank and punish do.
The end result was that student writing scores soared into orbit and beyond the moon from the previous scores years. In an English department meeting a few years later, the VP holding the meeting put up an overhead that revealed the gain in writing skills per teacher and one bar soared high above all the others. It turned out that one bar on a chart that represented writing gains in every English teachers class at the same grade level came from my students.
And grades were based on the final draft after the student groups filled out those rubrics. In the end, each completed essay ended up with about ten rubrics from ten groups, not in their class, but from one of my other classes. To avoid anyone knowing who wrote an essay, names were left off and I assigned ID numbers (at home working outside of the regualr school day) so that only I knew who wrote what and what class the essay came from. Using those student generated rubrics with constructive criticism included, period one might be read and scored by period three but period three would be scored by another period, not period one even though period three was never told what class set of essays they were reading.
If a student turned in a final draft after they were allowed to write a final draft after the reading groups using that rubric the grade was almost always an auto A, because those final drafts were on topic and well supported. How could a student fail if they took part and cooperated through this process. Even the students who didn’t write an essay learned because they were still assigned to those reading groups that used the student generated rubrics. By reading a class set of student essays and using a rubric designed to help students improve their writing instead of judging them, even students that did not write an essay learned what a proepr essay was like.
It was a lot of work for me to organize but well worth it for the students who took part in the process and even the students who didn’t.
I like Lloyd’s ideas. I intend to try this approach out in a history setting. Thanks you. But my students are sick of hearing the word “rubric” so I will probably call it guidelines for writing a good history essay and think of a good acronym.
Remember, rubrics are the devil’s tool!
The Danielson Rubric, in my experience, belabors the obvious about teaching, but does do with the maximum degree of prolixity available to its author. When I’m handed a page from this turgid document at professional development sessions in our school, I am always reminded of the classroom scene in Monty Python’s “The Meaning of Life” in which John Cleese, the teacher, spins out a hopelessly convoluted–and therefore confusing–set of instructions on his students’ weekend plans (“If you’re going home but writing a letter…if you are going home, but not writing a letter” etc.).
Danielson and Marzano offer a one size fits all (or else) version of perfected teaching. Shape up or ship out. Several years ago I initiated an inquiry about the evidence in support of the use of the Danielson rubrics for all subjects and all grades. I had checked the researc citations at the website. As usual, these were the lazy kind, correlating math and reading scores from standardized tests in grades three to eight, with scores on the Danielson Framework for Teaching.
To my surprise, Charlotte Danielson responded by email. She said there was no evidence to support the use of those rubrics for every subject and grade level. She regretted that. She was then in the process of making thrubics comport with th Common Core. I have not checked back.
I am reasonably confident that theater, filmmaking, almost all teaching and learning in the arts is made stupid, simplistic, formulaic, strictly academic (in the worst sense) by any mandated use of these rubrics. Similar criteria for teaching are echoed in the requirements for edPTA . Variants appear in those miserable SLOs with twenty-plus criteria that function as proxies for a teaching straight jacket. The Council for Acceditation of Educator Preparation is filled with rubric-like jargon.
The presence of objectivity has become more important than respect for a long tradition of peer mentoring and honoring the wisdom available from experienced teachers.
From an evaluation meeting: “I really want to tick off all the boxes at “distinguished”, but then I’d hear from the Board that each teacher MUST have something she should be working on to improve, so even though I know you’re “distinguished” across the board, I checked the “proficient”in this category. You do understand that I think it should be “distinguished”, right?” Yup. Inspirational meeting. So happy I left.
Have heard that same nonsense well before Marzano and Danielson.
And then when the adminimals started doing “drive bys” and using scores from 0-7 we were told no one, absolutely no one could get a 7. Somehow I got a couple of 7s and all the teachers were amused (considering my penchant for “questioning” things). Meant nothing to me. I always self evaluated long before an adminimal had a chance to say anything.
I recently read a Dilbert cartoon where (I’m paraphrasing here) in order to get his bonus the boss has been told that 1/3 of his employees must FAIL their evaluations. So the boss is choosing employees arbitrarily: Welcome to modern day public school!
ciedie aech: that reminded me of …
Sunday, May 8, 2016, Dilbert is talking to his pointy-haired boss:
[start]
Pointy-Haired Boss: I can’t give you a raise because your performance was only average.
Dilbert: How can you calculate an average for my performance?
No one has ever been in my exact situation.
Pointy-Haired Boss: I compared you to other employees.
Dilbert: You compared me to strangers doing entirely different things?
Pointy-Haired Boss: No, I compared you to imaginary people doing your exact job.
It’s called MANAGING, and I’m very good at it.
Dilbert: How do you know you’re good at it?
Pointy-Haired Boss: Because imaginary people do this job worse than I do.
[end]
Link: http://dilbert.com
Sums up rheephorm metrics very well, don’t you think?
Thank you for reminding me of the above!
😎
Many years ago, I owned a small grocery store in an upscale neighborhood, where customers expected quality foods and a CLEAN store. Following one of our state inspections, the inspector complemented us, handed me his checklist, and said “I couldn’t find any deficiencies, but my boss will say I’m not doing my job if I turn in a perfect inspection, so I checked the ‘more than 5 flies’ box, even though I only saw 2.”
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
Yes. I remember. I went into myprofessionbal practice and learned on the job, to use what I had studied and TO USE MY NATURAL TALENT TO MOTIVATE KIDS. I learned what worked, and did not need a ‘rubric.’ I had my own rubric.
I’m surprised no one else has laid this at the feet of Linda Darling Hammond and Randi Weingarten. They have long advocated for making teaching more ‘professional’ with more difficult entry, enormously bloated evaluation systems, and never-ending professional development requirements.
They are partners in crime with Danielson and Marzano.
Priscilla – Just wondering what is wrong with making teaching more of a “profession”…as opposed to something that many still view as the place where anyone can go, where “anyone can teach” where, “if you can’t do…you can always teach” The Secretary of Education and other organizations have attacked teacher preparation and teacher evaluations for their lack of rigor, for their haphazard approach to evaluation, etc. thus the hope to have something more standard.
One other thing – I was recently at a presentation with Charlotte Danielson – she mentioned that she was rather sad and frustrated that her ideas of looking at key practices have been taken to the extreme that they have been. It’s not just the tool – but how the tool is being used.
Exactly. Any rubric is a tool. I was 21 when I stepped into my first classroom, and I had the criterias for professional practice which I had learned in 2 years of solid education courses – somethng missing today.
I had the state OBJECTIVES for my subject and grade.. (what each kid was supposed to be able to DO at the end of the year with me.
I had studied the ways the brain learns, and the latest psychology of learning and I knew WHAT IT TAKES TO TEACH… because I understood the needs of a child of an emergent mind.
Then, the school gave me the materials, the organization and support for my practice and I did just that… Ip practiced., and discovered what works with this child, but not with that one and I had the AUTONOMY to do what I needed to do…even if it waS not on the RUBRIC.
My son is a cardiologist. He knows what he needs to do in his PRACTICE. No one demands he do it their way. The ‘rubric’ for him was internalized years ago. The proof that he is doing the job is the health of his patients.
Yes, that’s what it means to grow up well–In and out of school we o the young have the opportunity t keep company with adults who introduce the young to new ideas, new worlds and personalities—the various aspects of what it mesns to be a powerful and learned and skilled adults. Apprentice adults learn best from adults who show what it mean to be an adult. Thanks, Diane.