# data[].attributes.headline
The Testing Obsession and the Disappearing Curriculum 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Testing Obsession and the Disappearing Curriculum 

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about the sad reality of how our scripted curriculum was stemmed from testing and has also led to an obsession of testing. This structure has led to a cut in what subjects are offered in school and how much time is spent learning about them!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Not that long ago, elementary schools were places where students could discover what they were good at, explore the subjects that appealed to them, or maybe just be content with enjoying school.

But for many elementary school teachers who joined the profession during the last decade, and especially those who work in high-poverty schools, classrooms that provide vigorous learning opportunities to all students never existed-thanks, in large part, to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

Today, more than a decade later, the law is uniformly blamed for stripping curriculum opportunities, including art, music, physical education and more, and imposing a brutal testing regime that has forced educators to focus their time and energy on preparing for tests in a narrow range of subjects: namely, English/language arts and math. For students in low-income communities, the impact has been devastating.

"Shouldn't these early grades be a time to discover, play, and explore?" asks Los Angeles art teacher Ginger Rose Fox. "We talk all the time about making our kids 'college and career ready'-even at such a young age. Let's make them 'life ready' first. But I guess that doesn't fit into our testing obsession."

Like countless educators across the U.S., Fox has witnessed the way critical subjects have been crowded out of schools or even eliminated entirely by the lethal one-two punch of deep budget cuts and the singular focus on improving reading and math. In Los Angeles alone, one-third of the 345 arts teachers were given pink slips between 2008 and 2012 and arts programs for elementary students dwindled to practically zero.

The good news is that money has begun to trickle back in-to California, at least. But slowly improving state budgets can only go so far. Breaking the nation's fever over high stakes testing is a steeper challenge.

Across the nation, the testing obsession has nudged aside visual arts, music, physical education, social studies, and science, not to mention world languages, financial literacy, and that old standby, penmanship. Our schools, once vigorous and dynamic centers for learning, have been reduced to mere test prep factories, where teachers and students act out a script written by someone who has never visited their classroom and where "achievement" means nothing more than scoring well on a bubble test.

"NCLB has corrupted what it means to teach and what it means to learn," explains NEA President Lily Eskelsen García. "Teachers have to teach in secret and hope they don't get into trouble for teaching to the Whole Child instead of teaching to the test."

In July, NEA launched a national campaign to bring an end to the testing obsession around the country, and to move real student-centered learning back to the forefront of public schools.

"It's our job to bring back the arts and Social Studies and world languages and whatever it is our students need to leave behind the corrupting, unconscionable testing culture of blame and punish by test scores and move forward with an education that opens their minds to the infinite possibilities of their lives," García says.
The One-Size-Fits-All Agenda
In a 2011 national survey, two-thirds of teachers said many academic subjects had been crowded out by an increased focus on math and language arts. About half said art and music were being marginalized, while 40 percent said the same for foreign languages; 36 percent for social studies; and 27 percent for science. The results were particularly striking at the elementary level, where 81 percent of teachers reported that extra time devoted to math or language arts meant less time for other subjects. Over 60 percent of middle school teachers and 54 percent of high school teachers reported the same in their schools.

The culprit? More than 90 percent of teachers blamed state tests in math and language arts.

"I've seen students reduced to tears from these tests," says Tom McLaughlin, a drama teacher in Council Bluffs, Iowa. "We're robbing our students of the joy and adventure of learning."

It wasn't supposed to be this way. When NCLB was implemented more than a decade ago, its promoters trumpeted promises about raising accountability and providing adequate resources to lower income students in struggling schools. But the law, with its sweeping mandates for standardized English and math tests in grades 4-8 and its crushing consequences for schools that fail to make "adequate yearly progress," merely created a toxic culture of "teaching to the test" in order to raise test scores. It wasn't long after its passage that a narrow, scripted curriculum blanketed schools coast to coast.

High-poverty schools across the nation have been forced to narrow the curriculum much more drastically than wealthier schools-with worse consequences for low-income students. While their more affluent peers may routinely visit museums or other cultural resources, many poor urban and rural students rely on their teachers to expose them to the kind of background knowledge that is essential to subject mastery. "It has been a disaster for social justice," wrote E.D. Hirsch, a University of Virginia education professor who has championed the link between content knowledge and reading comprehension skills, in his book The Knowledge Deficit.

But the architects of these test-driven policies do think they are addressing equity-and that's frightening, says Richard Milner, a professor of education and director of urban education at the University of Pittsburgh

"We should be appalled. It's tremendously short-sighted," says Milner. "They think they are being responsive to kids who are underserved. But they're clearly not looking at the lasting damage they are inflicting."

While opposition to NCLB and testing has strengthened over the past few years, Milner has been underwhelmed by the level of outrage, believing that the devastating impact of these policies on students of color in low-income communities hasn't been given the national attention it deserves.

"It's really sad when you walk into these classrooms in these urban communities because these kids sit all day," Milner adds. "We're taking away all the things about school they could attach themselves to-physical education, arts, history. All because some adult in some office, somewhere far away, has determined that they don't need any of that in order to 'achieve.'"
Integrating Disciplines-But at What Cost?
Thanks to the burgeoning STEM movement (science, technology, engineering and math), Brian Crosby believes science education may soon be removed from the endangered curriculum list. Crosby taught science in the Washoe County School district in Nevada for more than 30 years, recently leaving the classroom to become a STEM facilitator for the state.

"I do think there was what you might call an 'oops' moment," says Crosby. "Decision-makers basically recognized that you can't educate students, especially at-risk students, by hammering reading and math all day long. At least for science, there's some good news. We're getting the curriculum 'un-narrowed' if you will."

Unfortunately teachers of other marginalized subjects can't say the same.

In January, Texas lawmakers passed a bill that, among other things, cut the graduation requirement for social studies from four courses to three. The state's social studies teachers protested, wondering aloud how they would counsel their students to choose between classes: World history or world geography? Civics or U.S. history? How do you make that choice between such valuable courses?

If it's not outright cutting of requirements, states are commonly rewriting curriculum to more easily "integrate" sidelined subjects into core areas. Physical education becomes part of math. Art becomes part of reading. But tossing a ball with numbers on it isn't really physical education, and writing about Van Gogh isn't the same as developing a passion for color or practicing brush technique.

While integrating subjects can foster collaboration between colleagues, a good thing, notes drama teacher Tom McLaughlin, he warns what might be lost in the long term. "I do think integration can be dangerous if (any one subject) becomes too consumed or morphed into reading or math. We run the risk of putting these other subjects out of business."

Social studies often falls victim to "subject integration" with reading, notes Margit McGuire, director of teacher education at Seattle University and a social studies specialist. "It doesn't foster a very sophisticated treatment of the subject matter," she says.

Lisa Steiner, a social studies teacher at George Fischer Middle School in Carmel New York, also has seen her subject receive less time, staff, and professional development opportunities compared to school districts' chief priorities: math and English arts. Still, integration can work, she says. "Social studies as a discipline can reinforce core reading and writing skills. I have a background and certification as a reading specialist, so I see the close relationship between reading and writing in the content areas and it has influenced my teaching philosophy and approach."

For many music educators, the most compelling case to be made for music in schools is its value as a stand alone subject-to bring the focus back to the benefits to students, not to their standardized tests. In April, the National Association for Music Education (NAfMe) began challenge the assumption that music is merely a "supplement" to the core curriculum, and said the organization would no longer frame the importance of music around its potential to raise test scores.

"Every time we profess that students should have access to music so that their brains become better wired to solve math equations, we provide ammunition to the camp of 'education experts' who proclaim that music is an interchangeable, or, even worse, expendable, classroom experience," explains Christopher Woodside of NAfMe's Center for Advocacy and Public Affairs.
The Inconvenient Truth: Many Students Can't 'Catch Up'
While no one discounts the very real problem of students who can't read or do basic math, defenders of the status quo often claim that glossing over science, arts and social studies is merely a fleeting elementary school experience-later to be recouped in middle and later high school.

But by then, says Rich Milner, it's probably too late.

"Without learning opportunities, these kids can't develop the competencies and skills that will help them transition from elementary school," Milner says. "Kids in urban areas are in most need of a well-rounded education and yet they are the ones who have had it stripped from their classrooms-and they don't have other avenues available to them that students in suburban communities have to at least partly supplant what is missing in schools."

Brian Crosby recalls shaking his head in disbelief when he would hear school discussions asserting that it wouldn't matter in the long run if certain subjects for at-risk elementary students were suspended so they could focus on reading and math.

"The assumption was, you could catch the students up in middle school because by then they would have a science teacher," Crosby explains. "But they couldn't just catch up. And by the time they got to high school many of these students were so far behind they were put into remedial classes. And people would wonder why kids were dropping out of school."

What kind of citizens are these practices creating? Margit McGuire believes that continually pushing aside U.S. History or Civics robs low-income students of the opportunity to tell their stories and become invested in democracy.

"We marginalize our students when we don't allow them to bring their own lived experiences into the classroom," says McGuire. "Maybe we'll get their test score up, but at what cost? We need to help young people, particularly children from impoverished backgrounds, understand or value our democracy and their role in society. That's why we have public education."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Testing Obsession and the Disappearing Curriculum - NEA Today

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Not that long ago, elementary schools were places where students could discover what they were good at, explore the subjects that appealed to them, or maybe just be content with enjoying school.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked this short blog post because it allows you to start thinking about all the ways in which you really can and SHOULD stretch the boundaries of scripted curriculum if you are required to use it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The word "foolproof" means that even a fool can do it. So what do we make of programs that claim to be "teacher proof?" The growing trend to incorporate programs that are devoid of teachers deciding what to teach, when to teach it and how to teach it, is a disgrace not only to teachers but to all educators, and even to children. I first encountered a teacher proof program decades ago with the Assertive Discipline program. I railed against it, often being criticized for my intensity. I was once asked not to return to St. Joseph University in Philadelphia for the second session of a two-weekend course on discipline because of student complaints over my unwillingness to endorse the program. Fortunately Assertive Discipline has died from its own weight. But now the concept has spread to curriculum, teaching methodology and classroom management. I still rail against this demeaning and useless approach to education.

The Scripted Curriculum

I once visited a special education class in Milwaukee where they were using a new technique called Direct Instruction. The teacher read from a script as the students followed along in their books. No questions or deviations from the script were tolerated. There were even Direct Instruction supervisors who watched all the classes in the district to ensure these rules were enforced. A brave administrator (who prefers her name not be mentioned) did all she could to eliminate this program, and as far as I know, eventually succeeded. Direct Instruction cost the school district thousands of dollars.

In light of this experience, I'm both surprised and dismayed at the increasing use of programs like these. Curriculum scripting is now more common than shocking.

The schools that expect all teachers in any given subject to end on the same word each day unabashedly think that this helps test scores, and levels the playing field for all students who receive the same skills. In addition, scripting means there will be no consequences when transferring students within the district. They can easily pick up where they left off. I'm not arguing against structure or curriculum packages. Teachers, especially new ones, and students can and do benefit from not having to build programs from scratch every year. My opposition is to any program that does not provide latitude and decision making by teachers to meet individual student needs.

My view is that these programs have very little to do with leveling the playing field and everything to do with a false sense of accountability. As long as test scores determine student, teacher and school success, these one-size-fits-all programs will flourish, both academically and behaviorally. It's an old, long-discarded industrial model that considers students as products and teachers as replaceable parts, far more suitable for building cars than educating children.

Perhaps one of the most important principles for educators is that it doesn't matter what we teach; what matters is what students learn. If we cover something and students don't learn it, then what have we accomplished? Even a child in kindergarten knows that children learn at different speeds and in different ways. Without some form of individualization, most students will not follow the script and will ultimately pay for it. Ironically, most students do worse on test scores under scripted curriculum.

Not only do students suffer from scripted programs, teachers suffer, too. Teachers lose their creativity, their enthusiasm and their love of teaching. They lose their desire to be teachers. Many quit. The teachers in Milwaukee that I interviewed hated using Direct Instruction because their natural inclination was to elicit and answer student questions.

What Can We Do?

1. Recognize that fair isn't equal

At the heart of my work in student motivation (as described in Discipline with Dignity) is the concept of fair isn't equal. Even when involved in scripted programs, there is room for treating students fairly. We can show patience, making sure that students understand a concept before moving on to the next. We can listen to what students are saying rather thinking about what's next on the list. We can make time during the school day or during individual or group learning activities to help a child falling behind.

2) Differentiate instruction when possible

When it comes to systems, there are many ways to phrase and frame statements that show concern for individual students. Instead of saying, "If I do that for you, then I'll have to do it for everybody else," we can say, "Let me see how I can make this work for you." If other students want the same, you can give it to them because it helps them learn and/or refuse to talk about other students with them, because it's gossip. Which type of comment helps you the most and which makes you angry when at the customer service desk at a big store? Never stop sending the message to your students "I'll never treat you all the same, and that's the fairest thing I can do."

3) Use creativity to teach respect

Instead of saying, "It's against the policy, (rules or the system)" a far better response is, "Let's see if we can find a way within the policy, (rules or system) to help you get what you need." For example, if a student complains about the dress code, try to find something within the code that meets the student's need for more individuality.

4. Push for more individuality

Do what you can with other teachers and school administrators to push the boundaries of scripted instruction to allow for more individuality. In Milwaukee enough caring people, pushed hard enough to eliminate it. Every small change can and does help. Small changes eventually become bigger ones. I believe that teachers and school administrators are closest to the students and know best when free from pressure.

5. Be yourself

Finally, you have a personality -- use it. You can be funny, surprised and excited. You might need to follow some kind of script, but no one can stop you from being who you are. You have so much inside of you to give. Overcome your feelings of helplessness by allowing the real you to emerge as the focus of the lesson. Be a teacher, not a robot. Humanity always wins in this contest. Just ask John Henry.

Instead of using foolproof as the model, let's try "child proof," as in making things safe for children. This implies that the needs of the children come first. If anything should model foolproofing, then how about schools that are "bureaucracy proof?"
Photo credit: iStockphoto

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The word "foolproof" means that even a fool can do it. So what do we make of programs that claim to be "teacher proof?" The growing trend to incorporate programs that are devoid of teachers deciding what to teach, when to teach it and how to teach it, is a disgrace not only to teachers but to all educators, and even to children.

# data[].attributes.body
The Urban Education article stated "What is necessary for success in a suburban district might look qualitatively different from a rural or urban environment" and this made me think of the equity being giving each district the freedom to build what they need for their students and not forcing a cookie cutter curriculum on a district in which it might not fit.

# data[].attributes.body
My biggest problem with scripted curriculum is that they are saturated with racism. These scripted curriculums assume that all students are assimilated to the dominate culture. By forcing white culture to be exclusively taught in the k-12 curriculum, so many students of color are left out or isolated. Teachers need the freedom to design and create lesson based on their students context.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While organizing efforts by movements such as Black Lives Matter and responses to the hate-filled policies and rhetoric of President Donald Trump are heightening public discourse of racism, much less attention is paid to mechanisms of racial oppression in the field of education. Instead, conceptualizations that allude to racial difference but are disconnected from structural analyses continue to prevail in K-12 education research. In this chapter, our goal is to challenge racism-neutral and racism-evasive approaches to studying racial disparities by centering current research that makes visible the normalized facets of racism in K-12 schools. After narrowing over 4,000 articles that study racial inequity in education research, we reviewed a total of 186 U.S.-focused research studies in a K-12 school context that examine racism. As we categorized the literature, we built on a theory of the "new racism"-a more covert and hidden racism than that of the past-and grouped the articles into two main sections: (1) research that brings to light racism's permanence and significance in the lives of students of Color through manifestations of what we conceptualize as (a) evaded racism, (b) "antiracist" racism, and (c) everyday racism and (2) research focused on confronting racism through racial literacy and the resistance of communities of Color. In our conclusion, we articulate suggestions for future directions in education research that include a more direct acknowledgement of racism as we attend to the experiences and needs of K-12 students of Color.

References

Cullors, P., Garza, A., Tometi, O. (2016). A herstory of the #BlackLivesMatter movement. Retrieved from http://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory
Google Scholar

Essed, P. (1997). Racial intimidation: Sociopolitical implications of the usage of racist slurs. In Riggins, S. H. (Eds.), The language and politics of exclusion (pp. 131-152). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621-628.
Google Scholar

Ford, D., Botelho, G., Conlon, K. (2015). Spring Valley high school officer suspended after violent classroom arrest. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/27/us/south-carolina-school-arrest-video/
Google Scholar

Kohli, R. (2016). Behind school doors: The racialization of teachers of color in urban public schools. Urban Education. Advance online publication.
Google Scholar

Pulido, I. B. (2008). Knowledge-the fifth element of hip hop music: Mexican and Puerto Rican youth engagement of hip hop as critically rac(ed) Education discourse (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Google Scholar

Valencia, R. R., Solorzano, D. G. (1997). Contemporary deficit thinking. In Valencia, R. (Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice (pp. 160-210). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
Google Scholar

Zion, S., Blanchett, W. (2011). [Re]conceptualizing inclusion: Can critical race theory and interest convergence be utilized to achieve inclusion and equity for African American students? Teachers College Record, 113, 2186-2205.
Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The "New Racism" of K-12 Schools: Centering Critical Research on Racism - Rita Kohli, Marcos Pizarro, Arturo Nevárez, 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While organizing efforts by movements such as Black Lives Matter and responses to the hate-filled policies and rhetoric of President Donald Trump are heightening public discourse of racism, much less attention is paid to mechanisms of racial oppression in the field of education.

# data[].attributes.headline
Building a Case against Scripted Curriculum

# data[].attributes.subject
Building a Case against Scripted Curriculum

# data[].attributes.body
This article analyzes how NCLB has created a scripted curriculum culture and the damage it has cause on schooling.

# data[].attributes.body
The video I posted about trusting teachers discusses how the curriculum is so scripted that teachers should be saying the exact same thing as other teachers in that grade level at the same time. This lead me to the thought that perhaps one day our schools will be ran by "robot teachers."

# data[].attributes.body
This video describes scripted curriculum and how it works. In this video, teachers are interviewed and give their opinions on scripted curriculum.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scripted Reading Lessons and Evidence for their Efficacy

# data[].attributes.subject
Scripted Reading Lessons and Evidence for their Efficacy

# data[].attributes.body
This brief presentation discusses some of the advantages to scripted lessons.

# data[].attributes.body
When I first decided to enter the teaching field, a lot of my teacher friends and relatives told me exactly what the teacher in this article is saying. This is what makes me so nervous about entering the field, and why I almost didn't. Currently, I work in a school that does not have to follow the same standards and has its own curriculum.
I am anxious to see what it's like on the public school side when I begin student teaching in January.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A public school teacher in Delaware wrote the following moving piece but asked not to be identified out of fear of retaliation. It explains what is happening to many teachers who are being given scripted lessons aligned to the Common Core State Standards by their principals and district superintendents. Note that this teacher is not opposed to standards. It's an important point, as critics of the Common Core's implementation in many school districts have been accused of being opposed to standards and wanting to keep the "status quo."

Here is the teacher's piece:

Teaching used to be a fun job that I was deeply passionate about. I used my own creativity mixed with a healthy dose of perseverance, dedication and cheerleading to encourage my students, most labeled "special needs," to believe in their own abilities and self worth. I believed in their greatness and I helped them to believe it, too. In my nearly 25 years of teaching children I have seen learning disabled, non-readers become college graduates; non-writers grow to be valedictorians; reluctant readers become bookworms. I've encouraged students to write, to risk, to think, and to try again all of my adult life. In fact, one performance evaluation stated that I was "a naturally gifted teacher with the unique ability to inspire greatness in my students."

I was taught in teacher's college that each student had an individual learning style, and that my job as a teacher was to discover each child's pathway to learning and help them to embark on that path. My calling was to meet the needs of the child.

Some years I witnessed the growth in the year I actually taught the student. Many times I simply planted the seed that another teacher watered and yet another reaped the harvest. Teaching, for me, has always been about the children. Their learning. Their growth. Their future.

I used to do many fun, innovative projects with my students. My students have owned and managed their own businesses, written children's books and read them to younger students, done year-long literature studies on specialized topics, hosted project fairs, and an array of other student-created, choice- driven projects. They have designed, researched, written and read beyond their peers. My high school students were required to read 25 novels per year...yes, even the ones with learning disabilities could meet this goal with the help of assistive technology. Meeting and exceeding standards has always been my goal.

Last year, however, my performance appraisal listed me as "satisfactory." What has changed? I'm still me. I still bring the passion, dedication, and years of experience to the classroom that I always have.

What has changed is Common Core State Standards. I was given a curriculum and told by my administration to teach it "word-for-word." In a meeting with my administration, I was reprimanded with "Don't forget, standards drive our instruction."

Standards drive instruction. Data determines effectiveness. Positive outcomes for students requires proof.

If I don't supply that proof, I'm not an effective teacher. Period. And my administration has warned me that my job depends on this proof.

I can't do projects with my students anymore because I have to teach the curriculum word-for word, and I am only allowed to use standards-based assessments (which I must create myself). It doesn't matter how my students learn best. It doesn't matter that the Common Core State Standards assume a steady progression of skills that my students have not been formerly taught. It doesn't matter that my students arrive at my door with a host of factors that I cannot control...their home situations, their former schooling, their attitudes toward school and learning and themselves, the neighborhood they live in, whether they are English Language Learners or have special needs, or whether they have just broken up with their girlfriend in the cafeteria. All those factors also affect student performance, but none of that matters. What matters is how my students perform on the state test. (And I must STOP teaching for 6 weeks in the spring to make sure our students pass that test.)

I'm not opposed to standards, it's the standards BASED part that I have issue with.

My students like to tell me that I'm old school. They are right. I'm from the school of teaching CHILDREN, not standards. I'm from the school of student needs, not student data. I'm from the school of thinking and discovery and choice; not canned, watered-down, one-size-fits-all, global curricula.

Like so many experienced, good teachers, I don't want to be a teacher anymore. But where do I go? I need to make a living, but who wants a "satisfactory" former teacher with no advanced degree? I've dedicated my life to teaching children, but with CCSS, teaching children is no longer the point.

Standards-BASED education gets it all wrong. They assume the best teaching and the best learning can be quantified with tests and data. Yet I've never once had a student compliment me on my academic knowledge or my data collection skills. I've never had a student thank me for writing insightful test questions or for staying up late to write a stunning lesson plan. But students HAVE thanked me for being there, for listening to them, for encouraging them, for believing in them even before they could believe in themselves. Meeting our student's academic needs begins with seeing them as human beings with worth and capability and gifting, not as research subjects.

Chicken Soup for the Teacher's Soul is full of stories of teachers who made a difference in student's lives through their care, their courage, and their dedication...not their student's test scores. Judging the effectiveness of a teacher on only quantifiable data reduces the art of teaching children to a mathematical algorithm can that be performed more effectively by a hologram projected on the Smart board than by an old-fashioned, caring, humanly flawed teacher.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teacher slams scripted Common Core lessons that must be taught 'word for word'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A public school teacher in Delaware wrote the following moving piece but asked not to be identified out of fear of retaliation. It explains what is happening to many teachers who are being given scripted lessons aligned to the Common Core State Standards by their principals and district superintendents.

# data[].attributes.body
"The curriculum is so scripted in that school that every teacher should be saying almost the exact same thing as every other teacher in that grade level."
This video talks about the cons of scripted curriculum. The gentleman in the video talks about three reasons why he believes scripted curriculum is a bad thing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
We Need to Trust Teachers and Ditch Scripted Curriculum

# data[].attributes.headline
Positive Outcomes of Scripted Curriculum

# data[].attributes.subject
Positive Outcomes of Scripted Curriculum

# data[].attributes.body
This is a case study published in 2014 about three teachers who still found success within a scripted curriculum.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How three reading teachers flourish within a scripted reading curriculum: A collective case study

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a short preview of the document. Your library or institution may give you access to the complete full text for this document in ProQuest.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is SCRIPTED TEACHING? What does SCRIPTED TEACHING mean? SCRIPTED TEACHING meaning & explanation

# data[].attributes.subject
What is SCRIPTED TEACHING? What does SCRIPTED TEACHING mean? SCRIPTED TEACHING meaning & explanation

# data[].attributes.body
This video is a very quick and dirty run down of what scripted teaching is.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is SCRIPTED TEACHING? What does SCRIPTED TEACHING mean? SCRIPTED TEACHING meaning & explanation

# data[].attributes.body
This book was referenced in an article that was strongly opposed to scripted curriculum. This book was mentioned because it shows the "proof" we need from students to show that they grow, learn, and become enriched members of our society.

I thought this was a nice way to think about a way to measure the impact of teachers on students in such a standards based, data heavy profession.

This book vs. data/standards just shows the ongoing argument of what's really important for young people to know by the time they graduate from high school, and what is the best way to teach them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Teacher slams scripted Common Core lessons that must be taught ‘word for word’

# data[].attributes.subject
Teacher slams scripted Common Core lessons that must be taught ‘word for word’

# data[].attributes.body
This article was easy to relate to. I like that the teacher in this piece is a veteran teacher of 25 years, because  she has the experience to say how teaching has been vs. how it is now. This story is happening all over the nation, but what shocked me is that this article is from 2013. Since then, the data push has only increased.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A public school teacher in Delaware wrote the following moving piece but asked not to be identified out of fear of retaliation. It explains what is happening to many teachers who are being given scripted lessons aligned to the Common Core State Standards by their principals and district superintendents. Note that this teacher is not opposed to standards. It's an important point, as critics of the Common Core's implementation in many school districts have been accused of being opposed to standards and wanting to keep the "status quo."

Here is the teacher's piece:

Teaching used to be a fun job that I was deeply passionate about. I used my own creativity mixed with a healthy dose of perseverance, dedication and cheerleading to encourage my students, most labeled "special needs," to believe in their own abilities and self worth. I believed in their greatness and I helped them to believe it, too. In my nearly 25 years of teaching children I have seen learning disabled, non-readers become college graduates; non-writers grow to be valedictorians; reluctant readers become bookworms. I've encouraged students to write, to risk, to think, and to try again all of my adult life. In fact, one performance evaluation stated that I was "a naturally gifted teacher with the unique ability to inspire greatness in my students."

I was taught in teacher's college that each student had an individual learning style, and that my job as a teacher was to discover each child's pathway to learning and help them to embark on that path. My calling was to meet the needs of the child.

Some years I witnessed the growth in the year I actually taught the student. Many times I simply planted the seed that another teacher watered and yet another reaped the harvest. Teaching, for me, has always been about the children. Their learning. Their growth. Their future.

I used to do many fun, innovative projects with my students. My students have owned and managed their own businesses, written children's books and read them to younger students, done year-long literature studies on specialized topics, hosted project fairs, and an array of other student-created, choice- driven projects. They have designed, researched, written and read beyond their peers. My high school students were required to read 25 novels per year...yes, even the ones with learning disabilities could meet this goal with the help of assistive technology. Meeting and exceeding standards has always been my goal.

Last year, however, my performance appraisal listed me as "satisfactory." What has changed? I'm still me. I still bring the passion, dedication, and years of experience to the classroom that I always have.

What has changed is Common Core State Standards. I was given a curriculum and told by my administration to teach it "word-for-word." In a meeting with my administration, I was reprimanded with "Don't forget, standards drive our instruction."

Standards drive instruction. Data determines effectiveness. Positive outcomes for students requires proof.

If I don't supply that proof, I'm not an effective teacher. Period. And my administration has warned me that my job depends on this proof.

I can't do projects with my students anymore because I have to teach the curriculum word-for word, and I am only allowed to use standards-based assessments (which I must create myself). It doesn't matter how my students learn best. It doesn't matter that the Common Core State Standards assume a steady progression of skills that my students have not been formerly taught. It doesn't matter that my students arrive at my door with a host of factors that I cannot control...their home situations, their former schooling, their attitudes toward school and learning and themselves, the neighborhood they live in, whether they are English Language Learners or have special needs, or whether they have just broken up with their girlfriend in the cafeteria. All those factors also affect student performance, but none of that matters. What matters is how my students perform on the state test. (And I must STOP teaching for 6 weeks in the spring to make sure our students pass that test.)

I'm not opposed to standards, it's the standards BASED part that I have issue with.

My students like to tell me that I'm old school. They are right. I'm from the school of teaching CHILDREN, not standards. I'm from the school of student needs, not student data. I'm from the school of thinking and discovery and choice; not canned, watered-down, one-size-fits-all, global curricula.

Like so many experienced, good teachers, I don't want to be a teacher anymore. But where do I go? I need to make a living, but who wants a "satisfactory" former teacher with no advanced degree? I've dedicated my life to teaching children, but with CCSS, teaching children is no longer the point.

Standards-BASED education gets it all wrong. They assume the best teaching and the best learning can be quantified with tests and data. Yet I've never once had a student compliment me on my academic knowledge or my data collection skills. I've never had a student thank me for writing insightful test questions or for staying up late to write a stunning lesson plan. But students HAVE thanked me for being there, for listening to them, for encouraging them, for believing in them even before they could believe in themselves. Meeting our student's academic needs begins with seeing them as human beings with worth and capability and gifting, not as research subjects.

Chicken Soup for the Teacher's Soul is full of stories of teachers who made a difference in student's lives through their care, their courage, and their dedication...not their student's test scores. Judging the effectiveness of a teacher on only quantifiable data reduces the art of teaching children to a mathematical algorithm can that be performed more effectively by a hologram projected on the Smart board than by an old-fashioned, caring, humanly flawed teacher.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teacher slams scripted Common Core lessons that must be taught 'word for word'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A public school teacher in Delaware wrote the following moving piece but asked not to be identified out of fear of retaliation. It explains what is happening to many teachers who are being given scripted lessons aligned to the Common Core State Standards by their principals and district superintendents.

# data[].attributes.body
My district has recently adopted the literacy collaborative framework and it has some really interesting components that allow for the educators to be the instructional decision makers. This allows us to teach in response to what our students need. This site gives more info about the framework and its' components.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A comprehensive school reform project designed to improve the reading, writing, and language skills of elementary and middle level children.

The goal of this comprehensive effort is to significantly raise the level of achievement for all students.

The cornerstone of our project is dynamic, long-term professional development. We train school-based literacy coaches in research-based methods and provide them with ongoing professional development as they continually implement these approaches in their own classrooms, and we support them as they provide on-site training for the teachers in their schools.

Literacy Collaborative PD

Literacy Collaborative incorporates all of the elements of effective schools to support improved literacy instruction and student achievement through:

Research-Based

Providing a research-based instructional model that is language-based, student-centered, process-oriented, and outcome-based.

Leadership

Creating in-school and in-district leadership through the training and support of school-based literacy leadership teams, administrators, and literacy coaches.

Long-Term PD

Establishing long-term site-based development for every member of the school's literacy faculty.

Assessment

Helping schools monitor the progress of every student through systematized assessment, data collection, and analysis.

Framework

Teachers provide direct, research-based instruction to guide students in acquiring strategies for maintaining fluency, text comprehension, and vocabulary development.

The Literacy Collaborative framework for literacy lessons consists of elements that provide many opportunities for reading and writing. These opportunities include reading and writing across the curriculum.

Framework

Standards

Standards are based on research of effective practice and are essential for assuring quality implementation of the framework. Sites that meet the standards are members of the Literacy Collaborative network.

The Literacy Collaborative Standards inform and support personnel who are responsible for the implementation and maintenance of LC schools and classrooms.

Standards

Implementation

Participation in the Literacy Collaborative represents a long term commitment to reshaping literacy education in a school or district.

Implementation takes place in four phases.

For each phase, local planning and decision making is required. Elements for each phase of implementation are accomplished with literacy coach support, school based literacy team input, and staff participation.

Implementation

"Every child deserves a great teacher, not by chance, but by design." - Fisher, Frey & Hattie (2016)

Literacy Collaborative

Literacy coach training:

Year 1

Literacy coach training consists of the equivalent of 35 days of coursework distributed throughout the year. The training is a blended model with face-to-face meetings at OSU (1100 Kinnear Rd, Columbus, Ohio) and online learning experiences. Find out more about the application process and Literacy Collaborative training.

Year 2 and Beyond

The literacy coach develops and implements a long-term staff development program for teachers, works with students in a regular classroom for at least 2.5 hours per day, makes presentations to interested groups, collects and analyzes data to inform instruction, and participates in on-going Professional Development at OSU Literacy Collaborative.

Recommended

Reading Recovery ® and Leveled Literacy Intervention are strongly recommended.

Leveled Literacy Intervention

Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI), developed by Gay Su Pinnell & Irene Fountas, is an intensive, small group intervention designed to accelerate the literacy development of K-2 and 3-8 students who are below grade level in reading and writing achievement.

Explicit instruction is provided in the five essential components of reading identified by the National Reading Panel: phonological awareness, decoding, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.

Learn how to effectively use LLI to teach 30-45 min. lessons to small groups of learners that are struggling with reading and writing.

Literacy Leadership Academy

Literacy Leadership Academy explores Administrator's roles, how children learn to read and write, and how to increase literacy achievement.

K-8 Literacy Professional Learning

K-8 Literacy Professional Development offers options for literacy coaches and teachers to raise achievement in reading and writing. The focus is to implement research-based practices and develop collaborative learning communities. K-8 Literacy PD gives participants the ability to customize their professional development experience.

Responsive Literacy Framework

Prepares educators to improve K-6 reading and writing achievement. Administrators are encouraged to attend with their literacy team.

The Art of Coaching Institutes 1 and 2

These coaching institutes prepare educators to coach K-6 teachers in reading, writing, and word study.

Literacy Workshops

Explore relevant topics such as strategic actions in reading, writing, and word study across multiple classroom contexts in our literacy workshops.

Join Our Mailing List

Receive regular updates about Literacy Collaborative professional learning and KEEP BOOKS

Responsive Literacy

A Comprehensive Framework

Edited by Dr Patricia L Scharer and written by experts associated with OSU's Literacy Collaborative project.

This professional text is divided into six sections that represent a comprehensive literacy framework: professional learning, organizing for learning, reading, writing, building blocks of language, and learning community.

The text is foundational for our Responsive Literacy Framework sessions and used extensively in other courses. Literacy professionals will find it a go-to resource for literacy instruction,

Purchase Text

Responsive Literacy in Classroom Contexts:

Guided Reading

The emphasis in guided reading is on reading increasingly challenging books over time. Students are regrouped according to their needs in a dynamic process involving ongoing observation and assessment.

Interactive Read-Aloud

Interactive Read-Aloud is a critical component of any instructional system for literacy; it informs and supports every other part of the literacy framework. Fountas & Pinnell view IRA as "an essential foundation of a good language and literacy program."

Writing Workshop

The workshop is designed to offer daily opportunities for learning, for meaningful application to writing pieces, for differentiated support for ongoing growth, and for interactions that develop writers within a literate community.

"Children want to become readers and writers, and it is our job as teachers to know that there are many routes by which literacy can be achieved."

Gay Su Pinnell

Sherry Kinzel

Intermediate & Middle Level
kinzel.11@osu.edu

Jenny McFerin

Primary
mcferin.3@osu.edu

Wendy Reed

Intermediate & Middle Level
reed.1824@osu.edu

Shelly Schaub

Primary
schaub.29@osu.edu

Contact

1100 Kinnear Rd #100, Columbus, Ohio 43212

614-292-7893 or 800-678-6486

Accessibility

If you need this information in an alternate format, email osulc@osu.edu or call 614-292-7893.

Mailing List

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A comprehensive school reform project designed to improve the reading, writing, and language skills of elementary and middle level children. The goal of this comprehensive effort is to significantly raise the level of achievement for all students. The cornerstone of our project is dynamic, long-term professional development.

# data[].attributes.body
Scripted curriculum can be very surface level and take away the flexibility of students and the higher level thinking skills that they are capable of having.

# data[].attributes.body
This speaks about real life innovative classrooms and how teachers should be trusted to create engaging and inspiring learning environments for students. This article makes some great points!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If we want to see innovation happening in our schools, we need to trust, encourage, and empower teachers to transform their practice. Too often, teachers are forced to teach inside the box and it can feel frustrating. In this post, I explore why teachers are the innovators, what's getting in the way, and what we can do about it.

Each day, when I ask my kids about their school day, I am blown away by what they are learning. Here is a quick sample from a single day:

My daughter tells about a hands-on, STEM / problem-solving challenge she did in class. It was so hard for her to figure out and she actually ended up in tears but now she's hoping they do another one on next Monday.

My middle son tells me about how his teacher has students celebrate their "epic mistakes" and how she has them talk about what they are learning from them. "I feel like I can choose harder work because I'm not afraid of making mistakes." He then tells me about the Genius Hour project that he's doing and why he loves going to school each day.

My oldest mentions the Socratic Seminars he's doing in Language Arts and the way he's exploring current events through critical thinking. Then his eyes light up as he shares every intricate detail from his engineering class, where he gets a new challenge each week.

These stories aren't rare. Recently, my middle son talked about how cool it was to create his own blog. My daughter talked about the books she got to choose from the library. My oldest son was excited about how challenging his math class has been.

The bottom line is this: amazing things are happening all the time but we've somehow bought into the idea that these things are ordinary simply because they happen often. But they're not ordinary. They're amazing. And they're small innovations that make a huge difference. And it all begins with teachers.

Last year, I created the following video for my cohort:

This is something I believe to my core. The future of education can't be found in a gadget or an app or a program or a product. It doesn't require a think tank full of pundits. No, the future of education can be found in the classroom. Every classroom is packed with creative potential and teachers have the power to make it happen.

It's what happens when we experiment. It's what happens when we give our students voice and choice. It's what happens when we abandon the scripted curriculum and take our students off-road in their learning. It's what happens when we choose to teach to your students rather than teaching to the test. It's what happens when we unleash the creative power of all of our students - when we make the bold decision to let them make things and design things and solve problems that they find relevant.

Sometimes it's messy and even confusing. It often looks humble. But every time students get the chance to be authors, filmmakers, scientists, artists, and engineers, we are planting the seeds for a future we could have never imagined on our own. But it all begins with teachers who are willing to take the creative leap. However, this is sometimes easier said than done.

This last week, I received an email from one of my students. He described the frustrations of developing an engaging unit plan only to be told by his cooperating teacher that he had to use the district's scripted curriculum instead. Now, I don't see anything inherently wrong with boxed curriculum. After all, a great novel is essentially "boxed." The issue is when institutions force teachers to use boxed curriculum in a lock-step way where they lack the permission to make it their own.

This district adopted the prescribed curriculum as a way to embrace "best practices in education." And yet . . . the district also describes the needs to meet the demands of a "21st Century Learning" and "spark innovation."

But here's the thing: innovation requires you to step into the unknown. If we focus all of our attention on best practices and codify these ideas into tightly packaged curriculum, we will inevitably fail to experiment. Here's a little diagram I created on this topic:

Too often, schools talk about innovation but they fail to trust their teachers to innovate in their own practice. Leaders pass out sets of boxed curriculum and we end up with master chefs who are stuck making Hamburger Helper or master artists doing paint by numbers. If we want innovative schools, we need to trust teachers to transform the learning. True, they can get ideas from curriculum and they can seek out experts but ultimately teachers are the ones who are closest to the students.

Okay, so we know that teachers are the key to innovation in the classroom. But sometimes the system seems stacked against them. We have rigid curriculum maps, tight deadlines, bell schedules, and the dreaded standardized tests. In some cases, we have scripted curriculum that strips the craft out of teaching. It can feel hopeless. However, here are some of the strategies I've seen from innovative teachers that I've observed who were stuck in rigid systems.

1. Make it a pilot. If you're not sure if your administration will support an innovative practice, try pitching it as a pilot. By doing this, you are sharing it as a temporary idea rather than a permanent change. Most administrators want to do what's best for kids but they can be reticent to jump on board with a massive change. So, if you can pitch your idea as a small experiment to help out kids, it will be easier to get permission.

2. Find the wiggle room. This is your chance to think divergently. Your rigid curriculum map might say you have 3 days to cover a specific standard but it doesn't tell you which standards you can't teach. So, incorporate more standards and projects. If you have a boxed curriculum, find ways to compact it and move toward a project-based approach. I remember when I had to teach this regimented 4-hour ELL block (one hour for grammar, one for oral language, one for writing, and one for speaking). At first, it felt impossible to innovate. However, I was soon able to turn grammar hour into our blogging and podcasting block and take part of the oral language block and redesign it for STEM. This approach requires you to see things from a different angle and ask, "How can I get away with doing what I know is best for kids while also following the rules?"

3. Get a team on board. If an entire grade level goes to leadership and says, "We want to try this new approach," it becomes harder to say "no." But this goes beyond asking for permission. It's easier to experiment when you have a full team that can provide support along the way. You are able to lean on each other when things feel confusing or frustrating and the change is more likely to become sustainable.

4. Show the research. I remember sending an email to my principal explaining my approach to PBL and design thinking. I shared how it was used in various industries as well as the studies linking the process to deeper learning. I also included research on competency-based and mastery-based assessment. My principal was able to see that I wasn't just conjuring up crazy ideas. I was conjuring up crazy research-based ideas - which is slightly different. In other words, I had been thinking strategically about the changes I was about to implement.

5. Communicate with stakeholders. If you're about to do Cardboard Challenges, send a note home explaining the critical thinking skills and creativity involved. Explain to parents how their kids will be learning to think like engineers. If you are about to launch a blogging project, tell your parents about global collaboration and the power of launching work to the world. Innovation can be messy and you're going to make mistakes. However, if parents are excited about it, they'll view the mistakes as iterations and learning experiences rather than evidence of failure. But this requires us to tell better stories.

I want to take a deeper dive into this last part. When we share the stories of the epic things students are doing, we move from pockets of innovation into a grassroots movement that empowers kids.

This is why it's more vital than ever that we are telling the stories of the good things that are happening in our schools. Here are a few ideas.

1. Share your journey through social media. For the last two years, we have had people use a hashtag for the Global Day of Design. It was so cool to watch it trend on Twitter, wedged in between two snarky hashtags related to political current events. If you clicked on what was trending, you would see mean-spirited memes, more mean-spirited memes, and then suddenly a video of fourth graders making Rube Goldberg machines and then a picture from across the globe students making roller coasters. It was awesome.

2. Have your students publish their work to a real audience. For all the fear surrounding social media, we make a mistake when we say, "avoid this" without saying, "try out this." Too often, the goal is to avoid a digital footprint at all cost rather than finding ways to create a positive digital footprint.

3. Partner with the community. Find ways to invite businesses, organizations, and families into your building. Instead of simply "seeing what's happening," they get a chance to be partners in projects and this leads to better relationships and deeper trust.

4. Brag about your students. Without naming names or identifying too much information, make it your goal as a teacher to tell people on Facebook or Twitter how much you care about your students along with what types of projects they are doing. Most people outside of the classroom are friends with current classroom teachers. Even if they don't comment on the posts, they will tend to view schools more positively when they hear bits and pieces of the cool things teachers are doing.

5. Share your story. If you're a teacher, consider blogging. Produce a podcast. Make a video series. One of the things I've realized is that the media won't invite teachers to the table. You have to choose alternative platforms where you push back against the narrative that our schools are broken and our teachers are awful. So, share your story and let people see the tiny innovations that are making a big difference. It might not seem like a big deal to you but it's a big deal to your students.

Maybe it's time we celebrate teachers. Maybe it's time we invite current classroom teachers to share a vision for the future of education because, honestly, they are the ones who are already making this a reality. And maybe it's time we trust teachers to lead the way in transforming their classrooms into bastions of creativity and wonder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If we want to see innovation happening in our schools, we need to trust, encourage, and empower teachers to transform their practice. Too often, teachers are forced to teach inside the box and it can feel frustrating. In this post, I explore why teachers are the innovators, what's getting in the way, and what we can do about it.

# data[].attributes.body
I love this site because it explicitly states what scripted curriculum is, the pros & cons of scripted curriculum, the components of scripted curriculum and the impacts it has on teachers and students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scripted Curriculum in Urban, Public Schools | Partners In Learning | Miami University

# data[].attributes.body
To follow suit of the negative impacts on teachers. This article analyzes the impact of scripted curriculum on teachers and students. The study backs up how many teachers feel in the profession.

# data[].attributes.body
This meme also serves to add some light to a very frustrating situation. Teachers are held accountable for students performance, but the curriculum is rarely ever seen as an issue. This doesn't seem to line up!

# data[].attributes.body
I find myself feeling extremely frustrated with scripted curriculum. Teachers are well educated a practiced professionals, yet we are treated like we don't know to create engaging hands-on lessons. This meme adds some humor to a very irritating situation.