RIGOR: You’ll know it when you see it
If you’ve had your fair share of Baltimore City Schools professional development this year, you’ve likely heard about the three big “do’s” from the office of Teaching and Learning this year: Rigor, Engagement, and Intervention. These are the things that central office will be looking for on classroom visits. And while professional development coordinators seem all too willing to address engagement through multiple intelligences and technology, or intervention, through data analysis, I seem to get nearly the same response from professional development coordinators when I ask what rigor is. The answer is usually the same: “It looks different in every classroom” or – my personal favorite – “you’ll know when you see it.”
I do not disagree with either of these statements. Rigor can look different depending on the content, the background knowledge of the students, and the repertoire of teaching strategies the teacher has at their disposal. I also have seen the elusive rigor a handful of times, when my students begin answering – and asking – questions that are ten steps removed from where we started instruction. But how can it be that the very thing that needs to be readily apparent in classrooms is so tough to even define? And how can new teachers possibly develop the capabilities necessary to incorporate rigor into their classrooms with no measurable definition or goal?
In my attempt to define what rigor is and how to incorporate it into the classroom, I did a bit of research:
In Strong, Silver and Perini’s book Teaching What Matters Most: Standards and Strategies for Raising Student Achievement, the authors argue that rigor is getting students to “understand content that is complex, ambiguous, provocative, and personally or emotionally challenging.” This means that what is important is what you teach rather than how you teach.
Others, including author of Teach Like a Champion, Doug Lemov, seems to believe the opposite – that rigor is in how you teach new material and the strategies that you use to engage students. This includes getting students to answer questions using complete sentences or requiring the correct (“right is right”) answer one hundred percent of the time.
My own definition spans both of these: rigor is both in what you teach and how you get there. Rigor can be enhancing the understanding the importance of concepts that you teach and how they manifest themselves in the real world. Rigor is also in the approach to understanding – how you question students or lead them to the discovery.
In their introduction of the 2010 Master Plan for “Rigor, Engagement, and Intervention”, Baltimore City included a power point slide for rigor, which included the following action plan:
“Develop a common set of expectation for what rigorous teaching and learning in all classrooms across the district through development of a deep understanding of the Common Core Standards”, and called for a realignment of curricular materials to the common core standards. It also called for:
1. Principal Development –training and support around leadership actions that transform principals from transactional leaders to strategic leaders
2. Teacher Development –training and support in the content areas and research-based teaching strategies
3. Re-Alignment of curriculum materials and assessments
(Source: BCPS Master Plan 2010)
I think that this is a sufficient start – but simply that: a start. An even more aligned curriculum and some new teaching strategies. A principal that is a pedagogical leader as well as a “transactional” one. Good ideas, I think. But not concrete enough to implement on the classroom level.
So until I have a more refined definition of rigor, I’ll keep using my own, hoping that when central office steps into my classroom “they’ll know it when they see it.”
5 comments:
I as well do not have a clear definition of what rigor is. I feel that I can do my part of planning what I teach and making sure that I challenge my students to analyze and explain the material in their own words. But I do not feel that my planning always guarentees that rigor is met in my classroom. I also feel that if rigor is such a focus in Baltimore city this year, why has it not been part a main part of P.D. and other discussion among the faculty and staff? I know that my math department meets to make sure that our tests are appropriate for our students and that we plan the objectives that will be taught throughout each unit, but we do not necessarily discuss how we should teach the material and how we will get our students to the next level. I feel that since the definition or rigor is not clear and we do not always see clear examples of it, it makes it difficult for me to know what it should be like and what it should look like in my classroom.
I think the problem with "rigor" is it really does look different in different classrooms. What works well for one teacher in encouraging students towards higher level thinking might not work at all for my students. I think we sometimes like to think of teaching as a "science" with a step by step formula. I think teaching also has an "art" side to it were good teachers are taught about rigor but have to make rigor happen in their classroom. I think that is where some of the problem comes in. Different teachers reach rigor in different ways. With that said, I do agree that a more concrete definition of rigor would help all teachers, administrators, and students.
Your post summed up a critical issue that BCPSS is having right now. It seems like the city is expecting this high level of rigor but is unable to provide a model or even an explanation for what it looks like. I agree with the idea that the issue is that rigor looks different in each classroom but there has to be something, ANYTHING, that BCPSS can actually provide for teachers to use. I sometimes think the issue is that it only reflects a lack of expertise in the leaders. While I understand the new CAO is a Harvard graduate and has worked in urban districts before, I am bothered with the notion that there is no model for teachers. Teachers have to provide models and rationale to students but seems like the leaders in BCPSS are unable or unwilling to provide models for teachers. I was told that when the CAO was asked why didn’t she provide a model, she responded that she wanted schools to develop innovative plans that reflected their needs an communities. That sounds great and all but schools have been trying to do this for years. It makes me think of a teacher who walks into a class, tells his students to do better on the MSA and says they have a year to figure it out for themselves. While I think BCPSS is heading in the right direction and has the right intentions, this concept of “add rigor” with no model seems almost lazy.
I actually just had a school wide PD last week regarding rigor that was pretty helpful. The presentation was by Robyn Jackson who started www.mindstepsinc.com and wrote the book "How to Support Struggling Students"; she focused on how to increase rigor in every classroom.
She mentioned a four step cycle of learning ~ Acquire, Apply, Assimilate, and Adapt. The first three stages should happen in every unit, while the fourth stage should happen every few units. There are a variety of ways to infuse important topics in your class before you start a given unit, and (like Blooms) you graduate the level of thinking eventually.
Rigor is such an evasive term that does mean different things to different people. I think having high expectations and trying to challenge your students is a start, but spending a lot of time on such vague ideas is not helpful, as the general confusion of this term promotes. I think it is true that rigo does mean different things to different people. However, presenting various viewpoints of how to apply this general idea in your classroom would be more helpful then just giving an opaque answer.
I agree with your frustration over the definition of rigor. I think that a 5 page research paper that uses primary sources as the main component of research is a rigorous assignment. However, there is a lot t chat needs to be taught in order to get there. Rigor does indeed drive a class but how does that look in a classroom that must cover many topics in order to prepare for the HSA? I'd love it if the district would provide some examples of rigor for each content area as well as grade level.
Rigor is a two way street. It is a gauntlet thrown and a challenge issued. If your students refuse to pick up the glove what is the result then? Frustration, in my experience. Those who do accept such a challenge do well and learn a lot.
Post a Comment