Why Didn't the STAAR Essay Matter?

Why Didn’t the STAAR Essay Matter?

Hey All – I talked to Sherry some more about the essays and weighting.

1. In fourth grade, there are 32 possible points. 8 of those points come from the essay. Kids have to get 18 points to score “approaches.” The essay itself is worth 25% of the total value of the test. Technically, kids can tank the essay and get enough of the questions right to still pass the test.
2. In 7^th grade, there are 46 possible points. 16 of those points come from the essay. The essay itself is worth about 39% of the test. So it gets harder for them to pass without doing well on the essay, but it’s technically possible.
3. In English I and II, there are 68 possible points. 24 of those points come from the essay. The essay itself is worth about 35% of the test. Again, harder to pass without doing well on the essay, but technically possible.

The question you asked:  Why did we spend all that time on something that essentially didn’t matter for accountability? How do we adjust our instruction to meet the growth expectations of the state?

And the dilemma: How do we design instruction to meet the demands of the test for the current year AND focus on best practices AND lay a foundation for success and scores in future grades?

The Principle of Context:

The written text is where rules are applied. We have to have teachers working with kids on lessons for revising and editing that looks like what kids have to accomplish on the multiple-choice section of the assessment. I don’t think we are doing a good job of “recreating” that kind of thinking and approach to what the kids are writing. When we are teaching revising and editing in context of a student’s writing, we are replicating a process of logic and thinking that is very complex. The answer choices for the multiple-choice questions identify for us the kinds of logical fallacies and pseudoconcepts that students have about writing. If we (as teachers) cannot name the logical fallacies and inaccuracies inherent in the incorrect answer choices, then we probably aren’t teaching them to students either.

How A, B, C, D Guide our Instruction:

     Here’s an example from the 4^th grade  STAAR test this year. I’ll work through each answer choice, name the grammatical lessons, fallacies, and instructional approaches implied by each answer choice.

A: This answer looks pretty good. It’s punctuated correctly. It establishes a good cause and effect relationship. It fits in well with the first sentence that described Lauren’s excitement about getting a new game. Combining the two sentences seems to eliminate unnecessary repetition and creates a better flow without that short choppy second sentence between the two longer ones.

If we are replicating this in the application of student writing, the teacher would model this type of sentence construction and flow, discussing why it isn’t very effective as it is. She would have to connect back to the author’s purpose and meaning that drives the decisions to combine those sentences. (Incidentally, this means that we would have had to read and understand the whole text, genre, and identified the author’s purpose before we started revising in the first place.)

In this case, it is critical for the reader to realize how engaged Lauren becomes in the game. Comprehension of this text, even though it is on the Writing test, is paramount.  That theme of excitement runs through the whole text. Establishing that cause and effect relationship early in the piece sets the stage for the reader to understand the rest of the story.

After discussions about the meaning of the passage and the author’s purpose, the teacher would give a charge to have kids re-enter something they have already begun to write. The child should have a clearly articulated understanding of their own purpose for writing, or the activity is meaningless. You don’t revise a sentence unless you need to change it to “engage the human mind” (Pinker, 2014, p. 2). When a child understands their own purposes for writing, it is then possible for them to find a cause and effect relationship they can reveal for the reader. Then the student can explore combining sentences that seem to fit together and form a flow that mirrors their purposes and meanings. After playing around with the sentences and seeing how the revisions fit with the surrounding text and impact the message, then the students can evaluate the effectiveness of their revisions.

This question proposes to test TEK 4.15C “revise drafts for coherence, organization, use of simple and compound sentences, and audience.” The mistake here is in pinpointing instruction around simple and compound sentences without considering how those sentence types create coherence, how they form organization, and how they communicate the author’s approach to the audience. Until a child can re-enter a piece of their own text to answer some important questions using “reason and evidence” rather than “dogma about usage” and rules, we will continue to see no uptake of correctly punctuated compound sentences (Pinker, 2014, p. 6). We will continue to be burdened with insipid prose. We cannot keep teaching writing as if it were a set of rules. Instead, we must talk about how writers can “enhance clarity, grace, and emotional resonance” with their readers (Pinker, 2014, p. 6). The lesson here is NOT about punctuating compound sentences. It is NOT about subordinating conjunctions. It is NOT about the meaning of “so” or “because. But I imagine that’s what most of our lessons look like instead of discussions about using compound sentences to connect ideas for the reader.

B seems like a good choice too. It’s punctuated correctly: you don’t need a comma when you combine sentences with a because after the first independent clause. It flows well together. The logical flaw here is the use of the word because. Skipping the introduction and getting right to the action does not cause Lauren to be so excited to play the game. Sentence 3 is the effect, not the cause.  I’d say that some kids might not notice the flaw here because of flawed instructional practices. Since kids don’t write complex sentences very well, especially when they begin with the dependent clause, teachers tell kids never to begin a sentence with /because/. Which is totally bogus. The correct way to write this sentence is to begin with the word because: “Because Lauren can’t wait to play Zoo Madness, she skips through the introduction and gets right to the action.” The lesson here is NOT about punctuating a complex sentence. It is NOT about subordinating conjunctions. But I imagine that’s the rule kids have been told do cite for their rejection or misinformed acceptance of this answer choice instead of advanced sentence constructions that could bring more variety and power to a text.

            C. Classic comma splice. The horror. But why is a comma splice so wrong? The whole point of punctuation is to separate ideas into meaningful units and to replicate speech for the ear. The writer who composes this sentence does not understand that two ideas are discussed here. Their thinking is mushy and unorganized. If the paper were to continue, I sense more runons and confused diction, but I digress. Mastering the mechanics of a sentence is the foundation of understanding main idea. Who/what are we discussing/ What are they doing or being? The lesson here is NOT about comma splices. It is NOT about missing subordinating conjunctions. But I imagine that’s the lesson taught instead of addressing the separation and segmentation of major ideas and points.

            D. Technically, the sentence is correct. Seriously. In some situations, it might just be the most effective way to write the sentence. Kids talk with a string of ands. Adults probably do too. If the author was choosing to replicate the diction or excitement of a child explaining an exciting event, that string of ands might work. I can’t climb into the head of the psychometrician who composed this item, but I can resonate with the teachers that approved this as an answer choice. Most novice writers have entire pages full of these strings of ands. And as with anything that is overdone, those patterns become annoying. And most kids aren’t choosing those strings of ands on purpose and because they mean to. The lesson here is NOT about compound sentences. It is NOT about the overuse of “and.” But I imagine that teachers tell kids not to have more than so many ands in a sentence rather than discussions about purposeful choices in combining sentences.

Solutions for Instruction:

Instructionally, rules without reason and connection to meaning and purpose is malpractice. Writing really does require a “sense of style” required by the “thinking person’s guide to writing in the 21^st century” (Pinker, 2014, emphasis added). Writing instruction should also convey a sense of style, or “’good sense,’ as opposed to ‘nonsense,’ in this case the ability to discriminate between the principles that improve the quality of prose and the superstitions, fetishes, shibboleths, and initiation ordeals that have been passed down in the traditions of usage” (Pinker, 2014, p. 7). The following paragraph establishes what I believe to be a moral imperative in writing instruction today:

Today’s writers are infused by the spirit of scientific skepticism and the ethos of questioning authority. They should not be satisfied with “That’s the way it’s done” or “Because I said so,” and they deserve not to be patronized at any age. They rightly expect reasons for any advice that is foisted upon them (Pinker, 2014, p. 6).

            A rule-based approach to our TEKS and test prep will not achieve our goals, increase our test scores, or prepare students for effective participation in society as thinkers, learners, and contributors. I’ve blathered on about what I think is wrong and what is implied about writing instruction in the age of assessment. I’ve alluded to some of the solutions in the analysis of the STAAR question, but I think that I can be even more clear.

Teacher Preparation:

1.      Teachers must analyze the multiple choice items to name the thinking required in each answer choice. The analysis must address more than naming the grammar, spelling, mechanics rule violations. Careful attention must be paid to identifying the flaws in logic present in the major distractor. (Distractors and items for campus focus can be found in the item analysis or the leadership report card from lead4ward.)

2.      Once the fallacies in logic have been identified, teachers must also focus on how the choices and rules reflect author’s purpose and message. Comprehension skills weave well into evaluating texts for revising and editing purposes. Writing instruction that leaves off the other side of the literacy coin (reading) is part of the reason we are in this sinking boat. Meaning cannot be divorced from writing.

3.      Lessons must be designed for students to replicate the kinds of thinking and decision points represented in the analysis of test items.

Seeds:

Students must have a self-generated bank of texts to re-enter, re-consider, and revise using the strategies and thinking required by the rigor of the assessment. I call these Seed Papers. It’s not enough to have seeds. You have to actually plant them. Till the ground and stick them in the lined furrows or scatter them across the scraped soil. And kids have to write. And if we ask them to write, it should be important enough to be shared and used. Why would you do something that you have no intention of using? Why would you plant seeds and never water them? We do that when we don’t give student writing a voice or a choice.

I learned about “grouping” strategies when I first went to a New Jersey Writing Project in Texas Institute. Later, I learned more about it in Peter Elbow’s Community of Writers. Bluntly, here’s what I think. Kids need to read what they have read aloud. They don’t fix their mistakes because they don’t hear them. Or they don’t care enough about what they have written to invest the tedious energy to fix the errors. Or they don’t have enough experience hearing and reading good material to know what could be done. I’m not sure that kids realize that their words are supposed to do something to another person. That their words have power and affect others around them. When we give them a chance to share their work with others, we give them a voice. We give them a reason to write well. We show them how they can make changes for themselves and others. And frankly - adolescents care about other adolescents. They are more engaged and interested in sharing with people like themselves...not us.

4.      3-5 Quick-Writes should be conducted in the first few weeks. These are collected in the writing folder to be revisited during revision lessons.

5.      5-7 Prewriting Activities should be conducted in the first few weeks. This type of prewriting should be the kind of prewriting that helps kids realize that they have things to say. The focus is on creating a place where students can mine their experiences and knowledge when they struggle to find ideas to write about. Note – I am NOT talking about prewriting activities with bubbles our outlines where kids plan out a paper they are about to write. I’m talking about Blueprinting, Quicklist, Trigger Words, Looping, Pentad, Classical Invention, Hexagonal/Cubing…

6.      3-5 Drafts Within the first few weeks of school, students should have 3-5 drafts. You’ll know you have enough when the kids say, “Are we ever going to finish one of these?” You’ll say, “I don’t know…are you sure…I mean, do you like any of them enough to continue?” These drafts become the seeds sown for the tilling and weeding required by the soil of revision. These seed drafts are where good writing begins to grow.

7.      1-2 Collaborative Drafts: Lead4ward’s year one ELAR Academy recommends an innovative practice that warrants consideration. Students work in small groups to compose a collaborative task. Over the course of the year, the writing process is modeled and then practiced collaboratively before students are expected to write independently. First, the group generates ideas. After new lessons, the group organizes and drafts a text. When revision is taught, students first apply the strategies to their evolving group text. And so on. This process matches beautifully the gradual release of responsibility and honors the socio-cultural construction of meaning.

Grouping Strategies:

Use Grouping Strategies to help build community. Students should be reading their writing aloud, receiving feedback, and reacting to other students. Here’s the basic protocol: (Carroll & Wilson, 2008; Elbow & Belanoff, 2000)

8.      Divide the writers into groups. The type/purpose/time available of your grouping will dictate how many people you place in each group.

9.      The writer reads his piece aloud without disparaging it. They read directly from the piece. They can correct/add words if they notice something missing. No paraphrasing or telling is allowed.

10.  Listeners focus on getting the “gist” of the piece.

11.  The writer reads his piece a second time. Others listen for a specific “charge” according to the lesson objectives. Listeners record their ideas on a sticky note, card, or annotation bubble in a digital document. They explain their commentary to the writer and hand them the card or enter their comment on the digital document. Note: Listeners should explain what they wrote and tell why they selected it.

12.  Repeat the information for each group member.

a.       After working with the strategies over the years, I realized that students then need to explicitly reflect on what they experienced in the grouping. What did they learn about themselves as writers?

b.      Writers take the cards or annotations given by the group members and annotate their piece by highlighting the elements the group noticed about their writing.

c.       What do the comments have in common, if anything?

d.      What do the comments reveal about their strengths?

e.       How can these strengths be applied to other places in the text they are composing now?

f.        What elements can be applied to other compositions or work in other classes?

g.      Students revise and set a goal for applying what they noticed in the next writing act.

Teaching Revision:

Sometimes an effective gardener will add plants to help the other plants grow. We planted marigolds next to the tomatoes to keep bugs away. That’s like adding a paragraph for explanation. Sometimes people grow plants in a nursery and replant them when they are developed enough to handle the weather. That reminds me of structuring an argumentative essay using Strawman and Concession as an organizational structure. You move the plants around to fit your purpose and timing. Other times, expert gardeners will take one plant and graft it onto a completely different plant. Writers do that too. They take what they have already composed, sometimes transforming it into a completely different genre.

Three Instructional Approaches to Revision:

In revising writing, students work on various elements: shaping or refining the organizational structure, focusing on craft, adding depth, making changes for clarity or word count. Mini-lessons and strategies provide students with tools to re-enter their writing. There are several approaches to mini-lessons: Direct Instruction, Inquiry, and Deductive

Modeling a New Strategy/Direct Instruction

1.      Show/Compose the model in front of students. (Modeled Writing/Think Aloud)

2.      Students identify and mark a place in their writing to attempt the strategy.

3.      Students compose/revise.

4.      Students read/share the before and after.

5.      Students determine which version is effective for their current writing purpose.

Mentor Text/Inquiry

1.      Show a mentor text or sentence.

2.      Explore the meaning, structure, and impact of the text.What do you notice?What surprises you? How/why was that done? Text structure, craft, genre characteristics, mechanics, etc.

3.      Students revise/compose to imitate the structure or effect.

4.      Or students can scan their writing to identify similar characteristics in their own writing (things they are already doing)

5. Create an anchor chart to represent the ideas that came from the discussion.What did you notice? Effect on the reader? Why did the author do that? Purpose? How does this inform us as writers? Strategies/Tools

Ratiocination/Deductive

1.      Share a “code”

2.      Brainstorm solutions.

3.      Students code their texts.

4.      Students resolve the codes.

Once students have revised in one of these three methods, it is time for another grouping. This time, the rules are slightly different. The writer only reads a portion of the text. These can be done in small groups or in a large group/whole class debrief.

Topics for Mini Lessons: What needs to be taught?

First, teach Revision Protocols

1.      Students read what they had already composed before learning the strategy.

a.       Students read the sentence before the place they marked for revision.

b.      Students read the focus of the revision.

c.       Students read the sentence after the focus of their revision.  

2.      Students now read the revision/composing.

a.       Students read the sentence before the place they marked for revision.

b.      Students read the revision/addition.

c.       Students read the sentence after their revision.

3.      Group members help the writer discuss the impact on the listener.

4.      Students determine which version they would like to use.  

Now

Select both explicit and global elements for instruction.

• ·         Explicit Mini Lessons: Teach lessons that fit the data analysis needs from last year’s assessment – the low TEKS.  Again, these come from the item analysis or the Leadership Scorecard.
• ·         Explicit Mini Lessons: Teach lessons that you identify from what you see in student writing.
• ·         Explicit Mini Lessons: Use any of Kilgallon’s sentence combining lessons.
• ·         Global Focus Mini Lessons: Teach lessons about strategies that writers use to revise. Depth Charge, Prove-It!, Show Don’t Tell, Pitchforking,…
• ·         Global Focus Mini Lessons: Use Jeff Anderson’s Invitation to notice strategies and teach from language that has power and beauty!
• ·         Global Focus Mini Lessons: Use the power of the reading and writing connection. Read good stuff to kids and talk about it in terms of purpose and craft. Write from the ideas the texts that make you wonder.

Editing:

            Pruning. Editing is pruning. You cut out the stuff that has turned brown, eaten by insects, isn’t growing well. Or you brace it up like an Japanese bonsai artists - contemplating the aesthetics and effect of the piece so that the viewer has a pleasant experience.

Students are now ready to focus on the grammar, punctuation, spelling, and such. Two things seem very powerful: Clocking from the New Jersey Writing Institute and Gretchen Bernabei’s Grammar Keepers 101 placemat. I changed my mind: three things. You can use Ratiocination to edit as well.

            Clocking: Throughout the unit of study, the teacher has been reviewing key points about grammar and mechanics. The teacher creates an anchor chart as items are addressed. When it comes time for formal editing, students take the most recent draft and number the lines. (How to add numbered lines in Microsoft Word.) Writers then gather all of their writing, placing the most lined draft at the top, and create a cover sheet with items the teacher or class has selected from the anchor chart. These are now the non-negotiables that students use to edit the papers.

            Usually, I have the students side in inside and outside circles, facing each other. They give the entire stack of their work to the person across from them. Students write their name on the cover sheet next to the item they are editing. Then, they read/scan the paper to check for that particular item. If I am reading Shanna’s paper for dangling modifiers, I will write my name on the line, write the line numbers where I think she should check, and the last line that I have edited. “Shona, 32, 46, 89; last 102). Now the writer knows where she should begin checking as well as what point the paper has not been checked. They still have the responsibility to keep checking the paper, but have some examples to guide them. After a period of time (the teacher makes the call), time is called, papers are returned, and the outside circle rotates. The process repeats for a new item on the list.

            Keepers 101 Chart: Can we just all agree that Gretchen Bernabei is a genius? Here is a link to her Grammar Keepers 101 Chart. I made a large copy of this tool to use as a writing placemat. Throughout the year, we teach the lessons with model texts and mentor sentences. Students write those examples in black ink. Then, they find or create examples from their own writing and record the response in another color of ink. When it is time to edit, students look at their writing goals, reference the chart, and edit their papers for those elements.

            Ratiocination: We used ratiocination earlier to revise. The only difference now is in the choices you make for what students are looking for in their writing about grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Instead of revising for sentence beginnings or passive verbs or depth, students are looking for comma splices, misspelled words, etc.

Polishing/Proofreading:

           

            I used to have a lovely philodendron. Over time, the leaves would get dusty or spotted with our harsh Amarillo water deposits. When company was coming, I’d wash off the leaves with a wet towel and sometimes would use a bit of mayonnaise to make them really shine. Writers need to revisit their work one more time before they invite people to peruse their hard work.

Are we forgetting this part of the process before we publish? This is the last chance before you turn in the paper...the last scan before you hit send...the last chance for saving face before you publish. You read with a pencil and make little marks or corrections if you have to turn in that copy. You correct last minute things as you read through, just to be sure. There’s always something.

Publishing:

There’s not much I want to say about HOW we go about publishing. But there’s a lot I want to say about WHY? To continue the metaphor: Why do we have plants anyway? Many reasons: food, medicine, entertainment. We don’t have plants because they have been artificially assigned to us in class. Writing should be no different.           

Begin with the end in mind, we say. Why do kids know what we want them to do? Because the objective is on the board? Or do we begin our lessons with models of what their work should look like? I think we ask kids to write things they have never seen. I think we ask kids to write things that don’t exist in the real world. I think we assign things for kids to write and never teach them how to do it. STOP. Kids need models and examples. Find, compose, or keep good models of what you want students to create in your class.

Kids should complete their work, we say. But why would they want to do much of the work we assign? Especially if we never taught them how to do it in the first place? Not doing the work is probably a more emotionally healthy response. Part of composing and creating is connected to what we care about. When we don’t care, it’s just not worth the energy. Human nature. Truth, ya’all.

So part of our work as educators is to help kids understand what learning inspires them to do. How do we help them create and compose meaningful work for real audiences about things they care about? The writing? It matters.

Armstrong Carroll, J. and Wilson, E. (2008). ACTS of teaching: How to teach writing. 2^nd Ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Elbow, P., and Belanoff, P. (2000). A community of writers: A workshop course in writing. 3^rd Ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.