May 6^th – 10^th has been designated as Teacher Appreciation Week, and while teachers everywhere deserve our thanks and appreciation all year long, the staff at the Institute wanted to take this opportunity to send a shout out to the innovative teachers who are involved in the Personalized Learning Initiative. These educators, and the districts they are employed by, are pioneers, engaged in an effort to truly transform the education system. They are working to gain an understanding of each student and then focusing on changes to learning and teaching that ensure each student gets the tools, supports and guidance they need, when they need it.

This is hard, unfamiliar and often uncomfortable work. Examining old assumptions about education and the delivery system and helping to design a new one is really hard work. This has led them to a very different, but much more powerful way of teaching. Yet, others often don’t understand what it is they’re doing, which can be uncomfortable.

However, every teacher we have talked to who is involved in the Initiative tells us that they would not want to go back to their legacy teaching practices. As hard as this work is, the results they are seeing in their students – academically, emotionally and behaviorally – reinforce to them that they are doing the right thing.

So we applaud your efforts and thank you for being courageous, for being willing to take this leap with us and try something different: To get learning right the first time, every time.

THANK YOU!

Jim               Kathy            Jean             Kim

Carolyn      Teresa           Laura           Diane

As personalized learning becomes implemented in more school districts to re-design public education, 15 school districts gathered at the Sheraton Hotel in Brookfield on March 12^th, 2013 for the 2^nd Annual Institute @ CESA #1 Youth Summit. A ‘successful day’ is an understatement, as students collaborated, engaged, and made decisions on what changes they would like to see. The day began with an overview of personalized learning to orient new individuals and districts and also for a brief recap for districts and students already involved in personalizing learning. Five students experiencing personalized learning proceeded with interviews and impromptu questions. This allowed students to create an image of their typical day. Students then participated in an interactive discussion to share their opinions about education and how personalized learning would change their future. Later in the day, each district gathered together to collaborate about their new ideas, and how they could create positive impact within their educational community. By engaging in discussions with other schools, students had the opportunity to understand what other school districts are doing. Lastly, these intelligent students could voluntarily participate in an interview on their educational experience thus far and how they viewed their future education. Students attending the Summit were provided opportunities to maximize their knowledge about personalized learning and learned the endless possibilities still to come.

As a member of the Institute @ CESA #1’s Youth Advisory Council, the opportunities have been infinite. The Youth Advisory Council engages students in various discussions on how to improve learning and how to create a personalized learning system that works for each individual. Over the course of 8 months, the Council became an efficient team assisting in the organization of the highly successful Youth Summit. We generated ideas and activities for the students to stay engaged and attentive during the Summit. The hard work, multiple meetings on Friday nights, and collaboration and deliberation, paid off at the Summit. The Council allowed us all to create a positive impact on our education and truly have our voices heard. As a student I was provided the opportunity to discuss my education on a personal level with a few of my teachers and administrators.

It is clear that education is a very important part of my life and will continue to be in the upcoming years. I wanted to make a difference in my education and truly have a say in personalized learning. This journey has been incredible, as I have made endless memories and opened countless doors for my future.

Yet despite our frequent involvement with networks, we may not spend much time thinking about how we can garner the greatest personal and professional benefits these relationship structures can offer. The staff at the Institute has been thinking about how we can assist individuals, teams and full staffs to tap the potential of our shared network. Our search has led us to an emerging framework or rubric to understand networks.

The framework includes five levels or dimensions of benefit from low level emotional support to life transforming experiences the we long to replicate throughout our professional careers. Each dimension can serve a purpose and offer personal and professional benefits, but as with most activities, the greater the investment, the greater the return.

At the lowest level of network engagement our involvement may be confined to sharing our frustrations, complaining about our situation or bemoaning the absence of what we desire. This type of network experience can provide a measure of emotional release and shared experience, but we rarely expect or experience any significant answers or learning.

At the next level we can find ourselves and associates swapping “war stories” about past experiences, past wins and the “good ole days.” Some learning may result from this experience, particularly for novice members. However, the application of the learning is often random and inefficient. Still, the feelings of association and camaraderie can make the experience worthwhile enough to stay associated with the network over time.

The third level of the network benefit framework involves “solution sharing.” At this level, group members may present a challenge or problem and other members of the network share how they solved the problem or how they see its significance. However, there is little effort to understand the context or nuances of the problem presented. Again, learning can result, but the solutions offered must be evaluated and modified in light of the specific and unique elements of the problem presented. This level of network involvement can offer even greater benefits, but full engagement and deep understanding are neither expected nor offered.

A fourth level of network engagement presents the opportunity for members to share their challenge or problem and other members of the network actively attempt to understand the dimensions, significance, context and implications of the situation presented. Observations and insights are shared and examined within the group. Solutions are crafted to address the uniqueness of the specific problem described. Members offer their ideas, experiences and expertise in service of the good of other members with an understanding that at another time the same commitment and efforts will be made on their behalf. Learning at this level of network involvement can add significantly to our expertise and professional confidence. Often at this level, the interaction is so powerful that continued and repeated experiences of this type are a strong attraction to remaining involved in the network.

The fifth and most powerful dimension or level of network involvement presents the unique opportunity to be a part of a group committed to create a solution, address a challenge or invent something that will benefit all members, but requires the collective efforts of the network to achieve the desired outcome. This level of engagement presents the opportunity to be part of an effort that is larger than each of us with a collective benefit greater than can be generated by individual and isolated efforts. Each member brings his or her best thinking, most creative ideas and complete commitment in service of shared success. Learning at this level often is profound and life changing. The experience can be so powerful that we spend much of the rest of our professional lives seeking to replicate the experience and the benefits it generated.

While each level of network engagement offers benefits, the work of designing and scaling a new educational approach that transforms the experience of learners in a personalized environment beckons us to build a network with the benefits of the two highest and most powerful levels of engagement. Our work is to make this experience not just possible, but regularly accessible to network members.

The PLN is part of the Institute’s Innovation Zone, but this “network within a network” structure allows PLN districts to learn from each other and build personalized learning environments based on the unique characteristics of large, urban districts. The PLN engages with the entire Institute membership as well, sharing their experiences and results and learning from other districts that are doing similar work.

The schools represented at the meeting were:

Kenosha

• Nash Elementary
• Stocker Elementary

Milwaukee

• Goodrich Elementary
• Hi-Mount Community School
• Eighty-First Street School
• Reagan High School

Racine

• Julian Thomas Elementary
• Gilmore Middle School
• Horlick High School

The PLN schools are at varying stages of implementation, ranging from the concept and design phase to active projects already underway in the classroom.

After a brief review of personalized learning concepts, participants completed a reflection activity based on the honeycomb model to help them define areas of readiness for possible project implementation.  “Learn and share” sessions allowed individuals to engage with others around a series of self-selected topics related to personalized learning.

At lunch, participants were seated in like groups (teachers with teachers, principals with principals), so they could network with PLN members from other schools and districts. The afternoon was devoted to team planning time and the completion of each school’s 30-60-90 day action plan.  Participants were highly engaged throughout the day and most left with actionable goals for the near term. These goals will continue to be reviewed and revised as the schools continue with the implementation of their personalized learning projects.

Watch for another update on the progress of the PLN schools in late spring!

In reality, the same stimulus might engage one person and go completely unnoticed or be rejected by another. Unless we are open and ready to learn; learning is not likely to happen. Herein lies the reason why the most compelling lecture, the most creative experiment or amazingly clear explanation typically engages only a portion of the class and generates learning for only a portion of students.

This dynamic presents a challenge to educators. We must create the conditions and environments that will offer the very best chances for individual learners to notice, engage and learn what they need to be successful.  We can no longer “sow” information like the farmer of yesteryear and hope the “seeds” of knowledge will take hold and grow. Our challenge is to assure that learner connections and engagement occur with the highest frequency and greatest depth of meaning and purpose that can be mustered. This combination of increased frequency of learner connections and greater depth of engagement holds the secret to dramatically increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of our educational efforts and system.

The research documenting the power of this approach is three decades old. Repeated research studies conducted by Benjamin Bloom and his graduate students at the University of Chicago showed that on average a personalized approach to instruction could dramatically improve the level of learning – two standard deviations or an average of 98% improvement – compared to traditional whole class instruction. Even more impressive, 90% of learners performed at a level equal to the top 20% in traditional classroom environments. (Bloom – Two Sigma Problem – Ed Leadership, May 1984) Unfortunately, at the time, Bloom did not see how it could be scaled. Thirty years ago we did not have access to the sophisticated technology tools available and under development today. Additionally, in the intervening years we have learned much about the brain, learning and teaching that promises to make personalized learning at scale within reach.

Still, we must start with a deep, rich understanding of the characteristics, learning preferences, interests, learning history and readiness of the learner. Without this understanding we cannot hope to increase the frequency and predictability of engagement and connections learners experience with what they are to learn.

Armed with this information and the active participation of the learner, we can dramatically increase the predictability of our efforts to engage learners in ways that result in connections, interactions and context building and new learning.  In fact, we can co-design and construct with students a learning path that accelerates progress and deepens understanding for each learner.

This frame for thinking about learners and learning represents a fundamental shift from traditional, legacy education approaches. In this frame the learner is not a receptacle to be filled with information, knowledge and skills. Rather, the learner is seen as a resource to inform, accelerate and enrich his or her learning. Individual learners are seen as key resources to be understood and tapped to design strategies and experiences that will result in learning that has meaning and purpose, and that leads to mastery.

Further, the thinking frame of the learner as a resource positions us to consistently gain feedback on the effectiveness of the learning experiences we design and instruction we provide. After all, unless our actions make a positive difference to the learner, they are not effective. If we do not have access to what is working from the perspective of the learner, we cannot calibrate and otherwise adjust in ways that improve the effectiveness of our instruction and predictability of the learning outcomes we seek.

So, what does all of this mean? If we hope to dramatically improve learning quality and accelerate the rate at which learners progress, we must start by designing learning environments around what will be effective for the learner – and we must include the learner as a resource and active partner in this work. We know from research conducted decades ago that this approach holds the promise to make a dramatic difference in learning for virtually all types of learners. Our work is to scale this approach and support it with the strategies and tools to move it to the level of a system; not just an exception or “boutique” innovation without the capacity to reach all learners.

Exciting work is underway in several middle schools in the West Allis – West Milwaukee and Waukesha school districts.  As part of its ongoing research and development, Educational Testing Service is supporting a research initiative titled CBAL (Cognitively Based Assessments As, Of and For Learning). As part of its work with the Innovation Lab Network, Wisconsin is one of just three states (along with Maine and New York) nationwide that are participating in CBAL research examining English Language Arts learning progressions in the area of argument.

Rooted in learning sciences research, CBAL defines learning progressions as “a description of qualitative change in a student’s level of sophistication for a key concept, process, strategy, practice or habit of mind.”  Learning progressions may be similar for many students, but are not identical for all students.  Think of it like crossing a stream – we may all have the same destination, but we will likely step on different rocks as we cross to the other side.  Learning progressions help in the scaffolding of instruction and the design of assessment tasks.  Different from traditional scope-and-sequence, learning progressions are highly interconnected and dynamic.  This is important to our work as they are intended to inform instruction rather than define curriculum.  Learning progressions are mapped to the Common Core State Standards and range from preliminary to foundational, basic, intermediate and advanced.  Students in the project write at about an 8^th grade level.

The CBAL Learning Progressions pilot began last fall in Wisconsin with two days of professional development.  A team from CBAL ETS worked with middle school teachers on the implementation of the CBAL English Language Arts materials, including learning progressions, formative assessments in support of argumentation, summative assessments, and adapting and customizing tasks to meet individual student needs.   As the year progresses, students are participating in instruction on reasons and evidence, taking a position and summarization.  Students also participate in both formative and summative assessments.  The teachers meet periodically in professional learning communities to examine student work, discuss what is working (and what is not), and plan for further instruction.  The CBAL ETS team will return in January to provide further support to our local teachers.  In addition to piloting learning progressions, formative and summative assessment tasks, teachers are also piloting professional support materials.

This is the first year of a multi-year project, and work around the provisional learning progressions is still in its early stages.  We look forward to sharing the results and making the work available for more of our Institute districts.

The morning began with remarks from State Superintendent Tony Evers, who indicated that we cannot move forward as a state without students’ input on education and learning. The State Superintendent hosted this event to bring high school students from across the state to share their ideas on what education and learning should be like in Wisconsin. Following, Jim Rickabaugh, Executive Director of CESA #1 provided a brief orientation to students about the current education system and the faulty assumptions that it is based on, indicating that it’s time to redesign the system to better meet the needs of today’s society. The opportunity we have is to create a student-centered, customized approach — to make learning personalized for every student. Jim then moved into an interactive clicker session with the students, asking about their current educational experience, what personalized learning may look like for them, and what the most effective learning style is for them. The results were clear; one student said “everyone learns differently.” In the late morning, Jean Garrity, Associate Director, facilitated a panel discussion of students attending programs in the CESA 1 area that are more personalized. They shared their experiences with the attendees via video chat.

After lunch, the students were asked to work with their tables collaboratively to create their ideal personalized learning environment. The energy in the room was palpable as students were on task and engaged in thinking and discussing their recommendations. Each table then shared their ideas with the others in the room as the students participated in a gallery walk to ask each other questions, probe, and learn from each other. They then had an opportunity to come back together as a table to share what they learned and make revisions to their own ideas. Before closing, students were asked about their experience of the day and also participated in another clicker activity. One of the questions asked was: “Do you believe you are capable of achieving more than your current grades reflect if you were given the opportunity to learn in the way you learn best?” 97% of students said yes.

The Summit closed with remarks from Scott Jones, Special Assistant to the State Superintendent who thanked the students for their time and ideas. The information gathered during the event will be compiled into a report that will be shared with the State Superintendent.

In addition, we’ll take the insights we found from the day to our Youth Advisory Council. Planning will be underway shortly for the CESA 1 Youth Summit in March – we hope to design a new program with the help of the students on the Council. Coming from this event, we can’t wait to start planning for the next event!

Certainly, some students find it easy to commit, naturally feel ownership for their learning and are quick to find a purpose to their work, but many, maybe even most, students do not. The question is: How can we increase the likelihood that all learners will develop this relationship with their learning?

Admittedly, students make their own choices and bring with them experiences, learning habits and dispositions that we cannot control and may not choose for them. However, they are not beyond our ability to influence. We still hold within our hands considerable potential to make a difference. The answer resides in how we choose to position learning and our instruction for students. Our potential to influence comes in helping the learner create a connection to and interact productively with what he or she is learning.

A great place to start is to give learners a meaningful voice and provide legitimate choice in their learning. We may not be able to allow student to choose just any learning goal, but we can allow them to choose among a reasonable list we provide. We cannot ignore standards and expected learning outcomes, but we can give learners a voice in how they will achieve and demonstrate achievement of the standards and outcomes they pursue.  We can also reposition our conferencing with students so that they are co-designers of their learning rather than assignment getters and direction followers. Further, we can engage students in dialogue that reveals what is important to them and then employ that information to make a strong connection and build commitment and purpose in their learning.

It is true that we cannot control the level of commitment, ownership and sense of purpose students bring to their learning, but we possess powerful tools to have an influence and increase the likelihood that these key learning accelerators are present. These tools leverage the voice and choice of the learner in ways that make commitment, ownership and purpose more likely to be driving elements of learning success.

Want to learn more? Join us for the November Institute Webinar, Thursday, November 29th from 12:00 to 1:00 PM. A team from West Allis-West Milwaukee will discuss how they use voice and choice to engage students and lift their learning.

Our 3^rd Annual Convening is behind us and we now have some time to take a few deep breaths and look back on the 2-day event. First of all, we want to send out a big thank-you to all the presenters and attendees for their participation over the two days. This was our third fall convening, and with over 300 registered participants, was our biggest gathering to date. For the first time we opened registration to districts outside the CESA #1 region and had school personnel from several non-CESA #1 districts in Wisconsin as well as district staff from Minnesota and Iowa.

The Convening started with a presentation by our Executive Director, Jim Rickabaugh. He connected the dots regarding the work of the Institute @ CESA #1 to provide a baseline for those new to personalized learning and an explanation of new thinking and research for those veteran districts that have been with us since the beginning. Following Jim’s presentation, Scott Jones, the Special Assistant to the State Superintendent, spoke about DPI’s Agenda 2017 and the Wisconsin Innovation Lab Network.

“Many take aways!”

Our keynote presenter for the first day was Gene Wilhoit, Executive Director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, the organization that established the Innovation Lab Network, of which the Institute @ CESA #1 is a part. Gene challenged the audience to be bold, to think systematically and to act with focus and urgency as they pursue their work around personalizing learning for all students. Jim then presented to Gene our Transformation Trailblazer award in appreciation of his vision, leadership and support.

The afternoon started with a panel of middle and high school students from area schools who are learning in a personalized environment. They shared their experiences and insights on how this approach is enabling them to engage in deeper learning and to take ownership of their education. Following the panel, we heard from a representative from each of four districts in SE Wisconsin, in a TED-like format. These districts have been engaged in this work for some time and are at what we call the model stage, where they are integrating elements of personalized learning across the district and bringing it to scale. Following the talks, participants had the opportunity to attend a break-out session of one of those four districts. These break-outs featured multiple levels of district staff and were a chance for participants to hear more in-depth about the projects.

“The best convening yet!”

Day two began with a keynote presentation by Ramona Pierson of Pierson Labs. Ramona was a keynote at our last convening where she shared her compelling personal story, and this year she spoke of the exciting things on the horizon related to technology, big data and predictive software, and how these are and will continue to be used in K-12 education. The Convening wrapped up with another set of break-out sessions where participants were again able to self-select from five options.

Check out more photos from the Convening on our Facebook page. A Twitter backchannel was established and judging by the over 300 tweets that were exchanged during the two days, participants were highly engaged. As one attendee summed it up, “Great ideas – my head is spinning!” We look forward to working with participants over the next several months as they develop and grow their personalized learning modules and models in their schools and districts.

“If you’re not prepared to be wrong, you’ll never come up with anything original.”
~ Sir Ken Robinson

Change, especially the type of transformational change we’re talking about to personalize learning for all students, is hard, scary and can sometimes seem overwhelming.  One of the main reasons for this ties into fears that most of us have – whether we admit it or not – the fear of the unknown and the fear of being wrong.

We’ve recently come across several resources that address this issue, albeit in slightly different ways. The first was this TedTalk video by self-proclaimed “Wrongologist” Kathyrn Schulz. Ms. Schulz posits that we all agree in the abstract that nobody’s perfect and everyone makes mistakes, but in the here-and-now, in our own reality, we all struggle with admitting that we’re actually wrong about anything. One of the main reasons for this is our society – from an early age, our culture teaches us that getting something wrong means there’s something wrong with us. This leads us to make less than favorable assumptions about others who might have opinions and ideas that are different than ours.  The value in understanding this mind-set and embracing our “wrongness” is that it opens us up to new possibilities and helps us to re-group when, as Schulz says, “we think this one thing was going to happen, and something else happened instead.”

Another resource was this post by Shaun Spearman on John Kotter’s blog in Forbes.com. Some of you may be familiar with Kotter as the author of the 8-Step Process for Leading Change. In the post, Mr. Spearman discusses the “mastery of the flip-flop” and how in the political arena it’s usually portrayed negatively. However, in reality, as events unfold and new opportunities or challenges are revealed, the success of organizations relies on the ability to recognize and adapt to change, and sometimes that means being willing to admit we were wrong. Spearman states that when circumstances deem it necessary, a leader’s job is to change course, but the key is to include staff in the rationale behind the change. He goes on to list three themes found in leaders that “embrace their inner flip-flopper” in responding to change:

1. Avoid the “Change Sneak Attack”
2. Setting Context is Everything
3. Seek Urgency BEFORE Proceeding

This post by Adam Renfro in the Getting Smart blog discusses using the Google 20% rule in schools and districts to foster an atmosphere of creativity and innovation. Developing this type of atmosphere is driven by the leadership at the school or district. Renfro says:

Innovation, creation, and production all require long incubation periods. If you want to do this in your district, you need to give it time, allow room for failure, celebrate the good ideas, and implement the plans whenever possible. Tech or curriculum’s first response shouldn’t be “it can’t be done.” It should be a priority for departments to help innovate. If you’re restricted by regulations, see which ones are state level and which ones are district or school level. See how you can rework the local ones to open up innovation.

Finally, we have been exploring the trapeze metaphor as described in this post from The Essene Book of Days by Danaan Parry. The post starts out:

Sometimes I feel that my life is a series of trapeze swings. I’m either hanging on to a trapeze bar swinging along or, for a few moments in my life, I’m hurtling across space in between trapeze bars.

Many of the districts involved in the Personalized Learning Initiative are either already in that “void” between trapeze bars or approaching it. They know that to truly transform learning, to get learning right for all their students, they’re going to need to let go in order to move forward. That in-between time, when we’ve let go of the old bar, but haven’t yet grabbed the new one can be a terrifying place, but it is also the only place where real, transformative change can take place.