What my students liked about my mastery-based class

I asked the students of my differentiated, mastery-based biology for some feedback at the end of the year, and I don't know why I was surprised by their answers. They pretty much summed up exactly what I'd hoped to achieve.

Here's how they answered the question, "What was the best thing about this class?"

"I liked how we got to work on computers and also how many different projects we could have done."

"Having you give us freedom to see how responsible we are, and the due dates so we can take our time learning about the topic."

"How we had to learn on our own."

"We had fun and learned at the same time. Very unique and creative class."

"The freedom of the curriculum."

"That we controlled it by doing things on our own."

"The best thing about this class were the assignments/projects and Dr. Green."

"Everything. All students got along,  fun learning, non-stressful, interesting material, good options/alternatives to tests."

"How we could do assignments at our own pace."

"The freedom of [sic] we can do what we want."

"Take things at your own pace."

"We go at our own pace on the assignments."

"The best thing was not having actual due dates and working in groups on projects for every unit."

"The best thing was having an option of how we got to learn."
 
"The vibes this class brought"

And two students blew me away with their answers to "What was the most important or interesting thing you learned in this class?"

"School/grades don't define you, but you should try because education is important."

"The most important/interesting thing I learned in this class was to always do your best and keep trying and never give up."

And that is what it's all about, isn't it?

Measuring (and teaching) responsibility

We all want our students to learn responsibility--to turn assignments in on time, but are late penalties the answer? Giving zeros for missed homework and subtracting 10% per day from late reports seems to make sense at first, but consider this:

I always have a couple of students who have trouble submitting their formal lab reports on time. They are worth 100 points out of a total of 500 points per quarter. If they turn in a report 5 days late, and I subtract 50 points, then 10% of their quarter grade depends only on whether or not they could turn this one report in on time. If we throw late homework and other assignments into the mix, it's conceivable that turning assignments in on time could end up amounting to 50% or more of a student's grade.

Heck, if we assign zeros to missed work, a kid's entire course grade could be nothing more than a measure of his or her inability to meet deadlines.

I agree that teaching responsibility is important, but is this really what we intend?

My goal this year in my mastery-based, differentiated biology class was to teach and measure mastery of biology and six non-cognitive skill areas, called GLEAMS. The A in GLEAMS stands for Aim, and I used this to measure goal-setting and deadline-keeping.

I had started by using rubrics to assign ratings to the six areas, keeping them separate from the overall course grade. I had planned to require mastery of each one in order to get credit for the course. I had done this with some success last year in geology.

The idea behind this is that the course grade itself would be a measure of mastery of biology, not the ability to meet assignment deadlines.

I ended up abandoning the GLEAMS system about half way through the year, not because it wasn't working, but simply because I had trouble keeping up with it. I even included GLEAMS in the student planning and self-assessment Google forms the kids were doing for every project, so the data was there--I just didn't have the time to track it.

And there were consequences.

As much as I tried to motivate students to work at a fast pace using only autonomy, mastery, and purpose, I think something was missing. I was no longer teaching or measuring mastery of the goal-setting and deadline-meeting skills.

I tried to remedy this with some encouragement in this area (Problem, Probe, Product, Pronto), but without measurement, I feel like it had little power. We all need immediate feedback in order to tap the motivating power of mastery.

I have a band-aid, temporary fix idea for this I'm going to try out this summer for my online science enrichment course, The History and Philosophy of Science (In 6 easy Steps): I'm simply going to make deadline-meeting a fixed percentage of the course grade--say 5%, and keep it in it's own category.

This isn't ideal, because the course grade will be a mix of cognitive and non-cognitive skills, but it's better than simply deducting late penalties. For one thing, at least it will be clear in the grade book where the mastery lies. And secondly, the value of deadline-meeting will be kept to a fixed level.

Now, I just need to be more intentional and explicit about teaching responsibility. After all, if we're measuring it, we'd better be teaching it, and measurement isn't the same as teaching.

Making a habit of accomplishment

I've been re-reading Charles Duhigg's The Power of Habit, and I've been seeing connections with Pink's Drive.

I was looking for connections, because it's not obvious how the concept of habits would connect to motivation by autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

But it hit me the other day, when I was thinking about how to merge the power of habit with the motivations I'm trying to build into my mastery-based biology class.

Duhigg tells the story of Febreze: It was a failure until the marketing team met a lady who used it every time she cleaned her house. She spritzed the bed with it when she finished making it. It was like the fresh smell indicated that the room was clean, and was linked to a sense of accomplishment. It's similar to the Pepsodent story--toothpaste caught on because Pepsodent left a tingly sensation in the mouth that people associated with clean teeth.

Duhigg says all habits are made of cues (triggers), routines, and rewards, and you have to use these 3 components when you build a new one or replace a bad one. In bio class, I've been working hard to create a routine of independent learning and project completion. I thought about how I could apply the Febreze/Pepsodent technique.

I need something students could physically do, and physically see when they complete a project, something that acts like a tingly sensation or fresh scent.

I came up with this chart on the board showing their progress toward completion of the unit projects. I asked them to color in their progress each day.

(I have no intention of this being a competitive thing. In fact, I told them as soon as everyone is done, we'll have a celebration. I intend to encourage them to help those who are behind.)

They loved the idea. All but a few were anxious to mark their progress.

The clinical classroom

I've noticed something cool since I started keeping track of engagement in my differentiated bio class: I'm able to view the whole thing more objectively, take it less personally when things go wrong, and see more clearly what works, what doesn't and what and how I need to change (I hope).

A few times during each class, I just walk around, a scientist with his clipboard, and note how many students are actively engaged in working on their projects, reading, writing, or discussing content.


As a scientist, I often see the world in terms of variables and data, but it's funny I never looked at my classroom like that until now.

My goal is to start doing controlled experiments, changing one variable at a time to see how it affects engagement. I know this is a tall order: I can't control all of the important variables (home life, events outside of school, in other classes, etc.), but I hope I can get some good info anyway.

On tap for this week: First, a much cooler project than last week. Let's see if it changes engagement. Secondly, I'm going to try getting more data than just counts of students who are working. Instead of just writing a check-mark if they're working at all, I'm going to use a version of my engagement scale:

1. Students watching a video (I give only brief lectures, but I post instructional videos on our Moodle site).

2. Students reading their text.

3. Students researching online, typing an essay, or drawing a poster.

4. Students discussing the project with classmates.

5. Students researching online, typing an essay, or drawing a poster AND discussing with classmates.

(I was discussing the measurement of engagement with a colleague this week, and we wondered how our flipped classrooms would compare with a traditional teacher-led, whole-class instruction classroom if we used a scale like this.)

My idea is to just record all of the numbers and the total score.

The next step is to track it for individual students, but that would take more time, I think. I'm trying to keep this minimal so it doesn't take away significantly from my teaching.

A 38% Day

Today was a 38% (engagement) day in biology.

My average up until today was 59%, though I didn't measure it two days this week because we were doing the pGLO lab, because it was so intense it took all of my attention to help the students with the lab. (I wish I had measured engagement, though: My guess is it was higher than 60%)

But I have a few hypotheses for why today in biology was so low:

1. Clarity: The pGLO lab was engaging. Doing real genetic enginnering on bacteri to make them glow is wild. But the packet they had to complete afterwards was downright confusing. They all got hung up on the same ambiguous questions, and this stalled them. Many were still working through this packet today.

The pGlo lab--genetically engineered bacteria
we made earlier this week.

2. Curriculum: Those that had completed the pGLO packet had to work on their Assignment 23. I knew going into this that Assignment 23 was going to be rough. I put 2 chapters worth of concepts into one project, in a misguided effort to gain some ground in the curriculum.The result was a difficult and awkward assignment that they are still struggling with. The packet option was way too long.

3. Clarity: I adjusted Assignment 23 earlier this week, having already seen the problem. I gave them a highly scaffolded project option and also the option of just doing the videos and quizzes instead of the project. But in this effort to assuage their fears about the assignment, I think I overshot. Some got the impression that there wasn't much to do for 23, and so they relaxed too much. Again, a lack of clarity was the problem.

4. Time of year: We're in the 4th quarter, after all, and burnout becomes an issue for teachers and students. I measured engagement in my two honors chemistry classes one day this week: 50% (they were working on problem sets) and 53% (working on a lab).

So, in short, I was not surprised at the dip in engagement today. The question is, what to do about it.

My plan:

1. Grade the pGLO lab with a rubric looking for general understanding rather than scoring each answer for correctness. Lesson learned: Make sure questions are clear--rewrite pre-packaged materials.

2. Not much I can do about 23 at this point, but in the future, don't succumb to the pressure to ram content through just to keep up with the curriculum. It's just not worth it if it kills engagement. Definitely need to cut some slack when scoring 23.

3.  Make sure Assignment 24 is clearer and more meaningful, and bites off less content. I think I've got this covered.

4. Plan for end of year slump by making assignments even more engaging. :-)

Key issues in making mastery learning a reality

I've been working towards a mastery-based learning model in a few of my classes over the past few years, and it's a daunting task. Here's why:

First, my effort is based on several premises:

1. Any scores or grades should clearly measure a learning outcome so that a student or parent or school can look at the scores and know what the students are learning, so that they can adjust and improve their strategies. If we take this to its logical conclusion, we end up with standards-based grading, rather than averages and percentages.
2. Anything we measure (grade/score) we should also explicitly teach. For example, we shouldn't be penalizing kids for things like late homework is we're not teaching them the skills required to manage their time and tasks.
3. Scores and grades are part of an external reward and punishment system, and if we want to motivate students towards real learning and creative productivity, we need to motivate them with autonomy, mastery, and purpose (A.M.P.), rather than threats and penalties and competition with their peers.
4. Zeros are bad. Not only do they skew averages and have a devastating effect on a students average, but they don't actually measure learning at all. They are really just missing data points.
5. The same goes for late penalties. They obscure the measurement of the students' mastery of a concept or skill.
6. If mastery of the skill or concept is the goal, then there is no reason not to allowing multiple attempts on assignments. In fact, this could help teach perseverance and quality.
7. There is no reason we couldn't measure things like responsibility, punctuality, and good social skills, as long as we intentionally and explicitly teach them and keep them separate from content mastery scores. And simply doling out penalties does not teach them.

So here are the key issues that have arisen:

1. We don't have a standards-based grading system, so the student's grades are just "averages of their mastery," at best.
2. Without zeros and without a standards-based system, our only recourse when a student is falling behind is an "incomplete," which has implications for things like honor roll and sports eligibility.
3. Without late penalties and other external incentives for quick work, we run the risk of falling behind the curriculum, too relaxed of an atmosphere in class, and too much off-task behavior unless we do a good job with autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

Solutions I'm working on:

1. Selling students on the idea of mastering the art of learning quickly and producing quality work--a key life skill.
2. Providing a complete course of assignments that must be mastered before credit is earned, so the students can see how their pace is affecting their progress toward credit. Working on this today.
3. Providing more meaningful and interesting assignments, to tap into the "purpose" aspect of A.M.P.

And why I care:

1. I don't teach just for the kids who already know how to learn, turn things in on time, and behave appropriately in school setting. I teach for all students.
2. My goal is not to be a filter, measuring students and judging whether or not they are fit for a diploma, college or career. My job is to actually get them ready.
3. No it's more than that, it's to help them learn how to learn.

Problem, probe, product, pronto

My biology class this year is designed around the thesis Daniel Pink outlined in his book, Drive: That the best way to motivate people is not with carrots and sticks, but with autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

I'm trying not to use threats of poor grades and penalties to keep my students working. Instead, I'm focusing on giving them as much choice as possible, allowing multiple attempts for mastery, and making assignments as meaningful and interesting as possible.

So how's it working?

I've been pleased with the quality of their work, and with their desire to revise it for a better score. And I'm hoping they are learning about quality and perseverance. But their motivation and engagement levels vary. There are really good days, some pretty good, not so good. And we've fallen behind the curriculum.

I'm convinced I can get a higher and more consistent level of engagement, and do it without threats and penalties, if I can just keep the levels of autonomy, mastery and purpose high enough.

Maybe this is too idealistic, but 1) I'm not sure the traditional model is any better, and 2) Pink's book was pretty convincing, and I'm figuring if there's a problem here, it's not with Pink, but with my implementation.

So here's my latest tweak:

I started thinking about the mastery part of motivation and what exactly I could hope they would want to master.

Here's what I came up with: Our goal is to master the process of researching a problem, learning about it, and then producing a product, and doing it quickly.

it to produce a high quality product. If they can master the skill of researching a concept or problem, learning quickly, and then producing a quality product, they will have a killer skill for the future.


I'm hoping this is something they can sink their minds into.

Let's see.