Skip to content
In education, a lesson makes or breaks a learner’s experience in a classroom. Planning takes time. I remember many nights and weekends that I spent countless hours developing a variety of activities that would keep my students engaged while also following the scope and sequence of the curriculum based on the standards that needed to be addressed. When it is all said and done, it is more about the experience than the lesson, but the latter is necessary to create the former. The key to strengthening learning and instruction consists of the right balance of two main components:- Instruction (what the teacher does)
- Learning (what the student does)
Balance surely is important. There is a time for direct instruction, but many learners would tell you outright that this component of a lesson is not what they really crave or find meaningful. In Learning Transformed Tom Murray and I examined research and evidence to conclude that kids want a learning experience that is personal while educators want alignment with the real expectations placed on schools across the world. Finding common ground in this area at times poses quite the challenge. Any personalization necessitates a move from “what” to the “who” to emphasize ownership of learning. Sounds simple enough right? Getting everyone on board becomes the challenge.
Make the shift to personal learning goes right back to finding the right balance between instruction and learning. Success in this area requires a shared vision, language, and expectations that not only make sense, but also jive with curriculum, standards, and assessment. Enter the Rigor Relevance Framework. Now I am not going to rehash the details of this tool as I have been writing about it for years, but I will provide an image of it below. The essence of the framework is quite simple as it allows for a lens for teachers and administrators to determine the level of thinking and relevant application that kids demonstrate while engaged in the process of learning. Instilling a purpose of learning while challenging all kids in the learning process is at the heart of a more personal approach.
Solid instruction should lead to great learning where kids are in the proverbial driver’s seat. The Rigor Relevance Framework unearths three critical shifts in practice that can lead to personal learning experiences for kids. As I love using images to articulate ideas and concepts, I will frame each shift with a question that will then be described in more detail using an associated image.
Shift 1: Are learners telling us what they know or showing that they actually understand?
Shift 2: Who is doing the work and thinking?
Shift 3: Who is asking the questions?
There is obviously more to consider when embracing and implementing the shifts listed above. A personal learning experience doesn’t sacrifice higher-level thinking and application just for the sake of relevance and meaning. Sound pedagogy lays the foundation with an added emphasis on scaffolding, innovative assessment, and improved feedback. Student agency and technology both play a huge role throughout by empowering learners through choice, voice, and advocacy. When these are combined to create effective blended learning activities in flexible spaces, the added elements of path, pace, and place further influence the personalization that will help kids flourish regardless of zip code or label.
However, it is the third shift that tells the tale as to whether a lesson or task supports rigorous and relevant learning to create a more personal experience for kids. If kids see and understand the purpose while being challenged, then they will be asking the questions. Better outcomes rely on transforming practice in a way that kids of the present and future can relate. Making learning personal is a means to this end.
No one can deny the fact that we are seeing some pretty exciting changes to teaching, learning, and leadership. Advances in research, brain science, and technology are opening up new and better pathways to reach learners like never before. This excitement in some cases is leading to change with supporting evidence of improvement. In other cases, money is being dumped on the latest tool, program, idea, or professional development without ensuring that instructional design is up to par in the first place. Pedagogy trumps technology. It also goes without saying that a solid pedagogical foundation should be in place prior to implementing any innovative idea.
Let's start by looking at practice from a general lens. To transform learning, we must also transform teaching. When looking at the image below where does your practice or that of your teachers lie? What immediate changes can be made to improve learning for your students tomorrow?
Now let's turn our focus to some more specific elements of instruction. It is important to take a critical lens to our work to ensure efficacy if the goal is to improve learning. With that being said it is incumbent upon all of us to make sure shifts to instructional design are occurring that result in better student outcomes. This is why a Return on Instruction (ROI) as described in Learning Transformed is so important both with and without technology."When integrating technology and innovative ideas there needs to be a Return on Instruction (ROI) that results in evidence of improved student learning outcomes."
The key to future-proofing education is to get kids to think. If it is easy, then it probably isn't learning. Challenging learners through complex problem solving and activities that involve critical thinking is extremely important, but they also must be afforded opportunities to apply their learning in relevant ways. This does not have to be an arduous process that takes up a great deal of time. Below are five areas to look at when implementing any digital tool or innovative idea to determine whether or not improvements to pedagogy are changing. Each area is followed by a question or two as a means to help self-assess where you are and if improvements can be made. - Level of questioning: Are students being asked questions at the higher levels of knowledge taxonomy? Do students have the opportunity to develop and then answer their own higher-order questions?
- Authentic and/or interdisciplinary context: Is there a connection to help students see why this learning is important and how it can be used outside of school?
- Rigorous performance tasks: Are students afforded an opportunity to actively apply what they have learned and create a product to demonstrate conceptual mastery aligned to standards?
- Innovative assessment - Is assessment changing to provide critical information about what students know or don't? Are alternative forms of assessment being implemented such as portfolios to illustrate growth over time?
- Improved Feedback - Is feedback timely, aligned to standards, specific, and does it provide details on advancement towards a learning goal?
Improving outcomes relies on aligning instruction to solid research, ensuring that pedagogical shifts are occurring, holding ourselves (and others) accountable for growth, and showcasing evidence of improvement. By taking a critical lens to our practice we can determine where we are, but more importantly where we actually want and need to be for our learners.
No one can deny the fact that we are seeing some pretty exciting changes to teaching, learning, and leadership. Advances in research, brain science, and technology are opening up new and better pathways to reach learners like never before. This excitement in some cases is leading to change with supporting evidence of improvement. In other cases, money is being dumped on the latest tool, program, idea, or professional development without ensuring that instructional design is up to par in the first place. Pedagogy trumps technology. It also goes without saying that a solid pedagogical foundation should be in place prior to implementing any innovative idea.
Let's start by looking at practice from a general lens. To transform learning, we must also transform teaching. When looking at the image below where does your practice or that of your teachers lie? What immediate changes can be made to improve learning for your students tomorrow?
Now let's turn our focus to some more specific elements of instruction. It is important to take a critical lens to our work to ensure efficacy if the goal is to improve learning. With that being said it is incumbent upon all of us to make sure shifts to instructional design are occurring that result in better student outcomes. This is why a Return on Instruction (ROI) as described in Learning Transformed is so important both with and without technology."When integrating technology and innovative ideas there needs to be a Return on Instruction (ROI) that results in evidence of improved student learning outcomes."
The key to future-proofing education is to get kids to think. If it is easy, then it probably isn't learning. Challenging learners through complex problem solving and activities that involve critical thinking is extremely important, but they also must be afforded opportunities to apply their learning in relevant ways. This does not have to be an arduous process that takes up a great deal of time. Below are five areas to look at when implementing any digital tool or innovative idea to determine whether or not improvements to pedagogy are changing. Each area is followed by a question or two as a means to help self-assess where you are and if improvements can be made. - Level of questioning: Are students being asked questions at the higher levels of knowledge taxonomy? Do students have the opportunity to develop and then answer their own higher-order questions?
- Authentic and/or interdisciplinary context: Is there a connection to help students see why this learning is important and how it can be used outside of school?
- Rigorous performance tasks: Are students afforded an opportunity to actively apply what they have learned and create a product to demonstrate conceptual mastery aligned to standards?
- Innovative assessment - Is assessment changing to provide critical information about what students know or don't? Are alternative forms of assessment being implemented such as portfolios to illustrate growth over time?
- Improved Feedback - Is feedback timely, aligned to standards, specific, and does it provide details on advancement towards a learning goal?
Improving outcomes relies on aligning instruction to solid research, ensuring that pedagogical shifts are occurring, holding ourselves (and others) accountable for growth, and showcasing evidence of improvement. By taking a critical lens to our practice we can determine where we are, but more importantly where we actually want and need to be for our learners.
In many cases, there seems to be a tendency to water down expectations when it comes to integrating technology. During a recent presentation on digital pedagogy for deeper learning I asked attendees to discuss then share out on TodaysMeet how they were effectively integrating technology in their classroom, school, or district. There was an emphasis on describing in detail what effective use of technology meant to them. As the results poured in there were a few consistent responses that stood out. Most attendees flat out stated that they or their schools/districts were not effectively integrating technology. Others confessed that they weren’t sure what effective use constituted. Many of the remaining responses centered on just a listing of tools that were being used as a measure of effectiveness.
The question about effective use provides a great opportunity for all of us to critically reflect upon the current role technology plays in education. There is a great deal of potential in the numerous tools now available to support or enhance learning, but we must be mindful of how they are being used. Take Kahoot for example. This tool is used in so many classrooms across the world to get students more engaged and add a level of fun and excitement to the learning process. However, most of the time the questions that students are asked to answer in a Kahoot are focused on the lowest cognitive domains and mostly multiple choice. I have nothing against Kahoot and think it is a great tool that has a great deal of promise. My issue is how this tool, and many others, are utilized in the classroom.
The burden of responsibility here lies with both teachers and administrators. In many cases the engagement factor is emphasized over learning outcomes and actual evidence of improvement aligned to standards. I get that this is not the end all be all, but nevertheless it is important. It goes without saying that effective technology integration should inform instruction and provide feedback as to the level of conceptual mastery students demonstrate. Then there is the unfortunate practice of putting the cart before the horse where acquiring technology and getting it into classrooms takes precedence over improving instructional design. In either case, for technology to ever live up to the lofty, and at times baseless, expectations that have been established we must take a more critical look at pedagogy.
For many educators SAMR is the preferred model often associated with technology integration. It’s a catchy model and does have some value mostly in the form of what we shouldn’t be doing (substitution). Take a close look at the tech-centric language used in each category and ask yourself what does the SAMR model really tell you about the level of student learning? This is why I love the Rigor Relevance Framework as a means to ensure that technology is integrated effectively. It provides a common language, constitutes the lens through which to examine all aspects of a learning culture (curriculum, instruction, assessment), and helps to create a culture around a common vision.
Technology should be integrated in a way that increases engagement through relevance. As students are utilizing technology are they just applying it in one discipline? I am not saying this is a bad thing, but we must eventually move beyond this typical comfort zone when it comes to tool use. When integrating technology does the task allow students:- to make connections across various disciplines and content areas?
- to solve real-world predictable problems?
- to solve real-world unpredictable problems?
The other aspect of this framework is the most important. Are students working, thinking, or both? Successful technology integration is totally dependent on the level of questioning that is asked of our students. This is why I always say that pedagogy trumps technology. Think about the formative and summative assessments you either use or see in your respective role. Are students demonstrating high levels of cognitive thought? How do you know whether students have learned or not when integrating technology? What does the feedback loop look like? These are extremely important questions to ask as a teacher or administrator to determine the level of effectiveness. Check out this example to see how all the pieces (rigor, relevance, tech, assessment) come together to create a powerful learning experience).
The overall goal when integrating technology should be to provide opportunities for students to work and think. Another key strategy for successful integration is to use technology when appropriate. Technology will not improve every lesson or project, thus a focus on pedagogy first, technology second if appropriate with help ensure success. Many aspects of the Rigor Relevance Framework can be used to guide you in developing better questions as part of good pedagogy including:- anticipatory set/do-now
- review of prior learning
- checking for understanding (formative and summative)
- closure
The most important aspects of pedagogy are assessment and feedback. If technology (and innovation in general) is going to have a positive impact on learning, let’s ensure these areas are improved first. Then going forward always lend a critical eye to how technology is being used to address standards and inform instruction.
