Setting the pace of instruction

By Joan Richardson

Four social studies teachers and curriculum leader Dan Langen huddle around a makeshift conference table in a converted garage of a home that has become the professional development center for the Mason City School District. Bottles of water, Styrofoam coffee cups, and scraps of paper litter the table as these teachers work to align the units in 8th-grade American History with state standards. By the end of their work, they will have a "pacing chart" to guide their teaching for the next year.

This scene is repeated time and time again in various subject areas in the Mason district in suburban Cincinnati, Ohio. Developing a pacing chart represents the confluence of several strategies that ensure both consistency and quality of teaching and learning throughout the district - across grade levels, between grade levels, and throughout content areas. It is a complex dance of strategies in a district that has often thought outside the box about how to run schools.

Mason is one of the six "positive deviant" schools and districts studied by NSDC with funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. These schools and districts are achieving above-average results with students although they have the same access to resources as other schools and districts in their areas. In addition to standing out from others, these schools and districts also have practices that enable them to identify good practices internally and ensure that they are shared widely throughout their school or district, thereby enabling all teachers to perform at higher levels. In Mason, the pacing chart is one of those practices.

On the surface, Mason looks like any other burgeoning suburban district. Spindly trees and fresh asphalt mark new subdivisions that have boosted the district's enrollment from 2,866 students in 1992-93 to 9,200 students in 2003-04. Rapid growth also meant rapid hiring. By 2002-03, more than half of the staff had less than five years of teaching experience.

Even as it scrambled to deal with bricks and mortar, Mason was linking quality with growth. Initially, that meant ensuring that every new teacher had the skills to be successful at the "Mason way of doing business." Soon, however, Mason also created a support system for all teachers that revolved around sharing information about curriculum and instruction.

That support system has two key components. The first is a cadre of 12 curriculum leaders who provide ongoing content-focused staff development for all teachers, with a particular emphasis on new teachers. Curriculum leaders spread good practices throughout the system. "We are paying attention to a certain narrow band of the curriculum and paying attention to the best way to teach that curriculum. It's the ultimate in translating curriculum into practice. We're all about writing the curriculum, implementing it, tweaking it, assessing it and re-tweaking it," said technology curriculum leader John Odell.

The second component is the development of tools--review sheets, pacing charts, common assessments--to infuse consistency into instruction and provide data about student performance. Again, while initially intended to assist new teachers, these tools have proven valuable for all teachers and their students.

PACING CHART

Both components come together in the creation of a pacing chart. In American History, for example, Mason is working towards getting the same content in all classes regardless of the instructor and ensuring that all students will be prepared for the required American History course in high school. Although a core of teachers works with the curriculum leader to develop the pacing chart, eventually all American History teachers will be invited to comment. Once implemented, all teachers are expected to abide by the group's decision regarding the course's pacing.

The conversation during the pacing chart's development also breaks down walls between classrooms. As teachers talk, they reveal many things about their instruction and hear a great deal about the instruction of their colleagues. Such barriers must be shattered before teachers will borrow ideas from others and offer their ideas in return.

WHAT DO WE BELIEVE?

Langen begins with a discussion about professional autonomy versus working in lockstep fashion. He challenged the teachers to be clear about their beliefs. One teacher was closer to the autonomy end of the scale than others. But he also agreed with his colleagues that more consistency between classrooms would provide more quality and be more fair to students.

WHAT DO WE TEACH?

The four teachers agree that their main topics are geography, colonization, the American Revolution, creating a nation, expansion, the Civil War, and Reconstruction. They also agree that instruction about Native Americans should focus on the interactions between Europeans and Native Americans, not Native American culture.

Next, on several large pieces of chart paper, the teachers methodically chart their units and the state standards. Where are those standards represented in the units they teach? They quickly see areas that they are overemphasizing, such as colonization, and others where they aren't spending enough time, such as Federalism.

HOW MUCH TIME FOR EACH TOPIC?

So, given what they've been doing and what they are learning, how much time should they allot for each topic? The teachers independently write down the number of weeks they devote to each major topic. When they compare notes, they find wide variations and the negotiations begin.

Abby Brewer devotes six weeks to colonization; her colleagues spend about half of that time. Her unit is more intense because of a simulated experience she has created for her students. "I love my simulation. It's an awesome learning experience for the kids," she says.

"Could you pare it down without losing the whole experience?" asks Chris Underwood.

"Oh, sure, sure. I could do colonization in four to six weeks and just not spend as much time on the simulation. As long as I don't have to give it up completely," Brewer says.

The others assure her they would never expect a teacher to abandon an approach that is successful. However, the discussion also makes clear that teachers' priority must be to ensure that all aspects of the curriculum are taught to the same high standard.

This process is repeated numerous times until the teachers reach agreement in each of the major topics.

WHAT SHOULD STUDENTS KNOW?

Next, teachers identify "essential questions" for each unit. When one teacher grapples with the concept of "essential questions," Langen rephrases it this way: "Think of the four or five things from each unit that you want students to retain for the rest of their lives."

By the time the teachers finish, each unit will include details about the writing and geography skills that will be included, which chapters from the history textbook are appropriate, and where they will use supplemental material.

Teachers also will use the pacing chart to identify units most appropriate for common assessments that they will jointly create. They will study the results of those assessments to determine the success of their teaching and what adjustments they will make in next year's pacing chart.