Website Evaluation

Title of Website: Grammar Bytes!
URL: http://www.chompchomp.com/
Date of Evaluation: Saturday July 26, 2008

What Makes a Good Website?

In my opinion, there are many things that make a website “good.” Obviously, websites should be reliable, credible, up to date, useful, bias free, serve a purpose and provide sufficient information. However, these aspects will not matter at all if the website URL is difficult to remember or spell, if the website does not look attractive and if the navigation is difficult, unclear or confusing. Essentially, I find that a good website begins with these simple aesthetic features. Then, if a website passes the “first impression” test, I look to ensure the authority, purpose, coverage, currency, objectivity and accuracy.

Aesthetic Features . . .

Grammar Bytes has a catchy name and an easy to remember and spell URL that is also humourous and possibly attractive for students as it sounds much more desirable than say, “grammargrammar” or “grammarfun.” Realistically, students are more inclined to agree that grammar does “byte” as opposed to “rocking” or being fun. Then, upon entering the site the colours are simple and easy on the eyes. The homepage is set up in a practical and effective manner with a simple heading and icon for each independent page. As a result, navigation is effortless. Students and teachers would both find this site attractive and easy to use. Thus, Grammar Bytes passes the “first impression” test with flying colours!

Authority . . .

The authority of a website clearly discloses that the person, institution or agency responsible for the site has the qualifications and knowledge to do so. Grammar Bytes does in fact clearly state who developed the site, Robin L. Simmons. In addition to this, there is an “About” link on the homepage which indicates is dedicated to “Meet Robin. Learn why she brought this site into existence. Hear about her future plans.” Which, does sound like it would provide adequate information to ensure proper authorship. However, once redirected to this page, it states, “Eventually, Robin plans to write something new here. Currently, she is busy blogging for her colleagues.” With that, I briefly checked out her blog that did not include any personal information that I could see. Her blog consisted of educationally related posts with another link to a page by Robin with a great deal of links to various readings. This would lead one to believe that the author is an educator but there is no clear indication of her qualifications. Furthermore, there is no contact information provided. Grammar Bytes has an online questionnaire which I assume would generate feedback from the author, yet there is still no e-mail or snail-mail address, phone or fax number. Finally, the website is supported by Markup Validation Services but not by any educational organization. Thus, the validity of Grammar Bytes authority is definitely in question.

Purpose . . .

The purpose of Grammar Bytes is most certainly clear. Grammar Bytes has been developed to inform, educate and provide educational resources for further educational purposes. This is clear in the organization of the links: Terms, Exercises, Handouts and Tips & Rules. Consequently, the content of these pages could be used by both teachers and students as teachers can use or distribute the material just as easily as a student could use the information online themselves. The only downfall I see in the purpose of this site is that the domain name does not indicate a purpose. Therefore, as fun as the “chompchomp” may be, it could deter some users from visiting the site. Regardless, the overall purpose once in the site is both clear and effective.

Coverage . . .

Despite my extensive exploration of Grammar Bytes, I’ve yet to fully cover this site in its entirety (though its links are not infinite as the coverage is directly stated). The author does not claim to provide comprehensive coverage of grammar, yet the site provides over 60 common grammar terms with exercises, handouts, tips and rules for each. Now that’s a lot! Thus, in comparison to other grammar sites I’ve visited, I would put the coverage of Grammar Bytes right up there at the top of my list. Of course, I do know sites that cover grammar in greater depth, but with the purpose of the site in mind, the coverage here is serving justice. Including even more coverage would most likely discourage students from utilizing the site as most grammar sites with extensive coverage tend to be geared more towards teachers than students. Therefore, I find the coverage perfectly suitable for teachers without being too daunting to students.

Currency . . .

For most sites it is essential the information be up to date. However, grammar rules are not something that changes. Thus, the education aspect of Grammar Bytes is steadily current as its product is timeless. Grammar Bytes copyright dates back to 1997 yet it appears that its author has tried to keep its images, examples and links up to date. There is a new link being added to Grammar Bytes for shopping which shows the author is attempting to be progressive. Additionally, there is a prominent feedback section where the author seems to take a keen interest in improving her site regularly. Unfortunately, I cannot validate how responsive the author is to the feedback. Moreover, there is no date specified for the latest revision made to Grammar Bytes. Overall, the material is not limited to a certain time period so the sites currency is not vital yet it would be a positive feature knowing that the site is consistently maintained.

Objectivity . . .

Grammar Bytes objective is not something one should be wary about. The site does not present any bias or subjective ideas. Moreover, the site is not trying to promote or sway its audience to believe or buy into any one thing over another. Additionally, Grammar Bytes is free of any advertisements or pop-ups.

Accuracy . . .

In accordance to most measures of accuracy, Grammar Bytes would not successfully pass a website evaluation. Grammar Bytes offers no statistics, references or bibliographical information and is not affiliated with a known institution. However, the information provided is true to the rules of grammar. The terms, exercises and handouts are all valid materials which compare to those found on other sites, in books and various notes created by educators. Thus, I would say Grammar Bytes is an accurate source.

The Verdict . . .

Despite Grammar Bytes ability to live up to each measure of what makes a “good” website, the bottom line is, I would use Grammar Bytes and I would recommend others to use Grammar Bytes as well. The site is easy to use, provides excellent resources for teachers and effective interactive activities for students. It’s attractive and offers accurate information for its purpose. Essentially, due to the nature of the subject, grammar, it is not necessary that the information be entirely current. Furthermore, as much as the authorship of Grammar Bytes is in question, any concerns that one might have in regards to the information on the site can be compared to others for validation. Thus, I highly recommend Grammar Bytes for teachers, students and anyone else who might want to brush up on their grammar skills!

Have "New" Expectations Crowded Our Sacred English Curriculum?

Getting Started . . .

Bah! Books are books. The plots don't change, the characters aren't any different today than they were decades ago. Shakespeare's not been able to contribute anything new to the study of Literature in nearly 400 years. The same parts of speech we learned in elementary school still make up sentences and everyone knows that if you string enough of them together you'll get a paragraph or essay if you're lucky . . . And hey, who doesn't know how to speak in high school? Overall, English is simple. English is ancient. English is constant and most of all, English is boring.

Blasphemy! Who thinks this way? Who believes this? Hopefully no English teachers raise their hand or give a slight nod in agreement. However, how many English teachers can say they've heard students express such pessimistic ideas towards the study of English before? Probably all of us (and if not, please tell me if there are any openings at your school). The point is, we as English teachers have a natural appreciation or passion for English and Literature. When we come across these students who challenge this idea, we strike back with great determination to prove to them that there is most definitely purpose and meaning in studying English. How do we do this? Well . . . We start by making connections. We make connections between the ideas and themes presented in those "ancient" stories read, to the current world. However, we know that's just not enough. Thus, we think of creative ways for students to explore their own individual interests through the practices of our choice. Or, to be completely accurate, our choice of curriculum practices otherwise known as expectations. It's true, us English teachers are sneaky like that, we like to find out what makes students tic and then we make them write about it! Hmmm or talk about it. Or . . . You get the point. The problem however, is that making connections with students in the 21st century is different than making connections with students in the 20th. Just like how making connections with students would have been different in the 90's, 80's, 70's and so forth. As a result, as society changes, so must everything around it; such as, fashion, technology and even curriculum. Therefore, as much as we could still make connections in the old curriculum with students, it becomes increasingly difficult; and thus, it is imperative that we incorporate new expectations to accommodate the changes in our students and technology.

But . . . That's asking too much!

What's with all the negative attitude? How come when a student thinks there is no value in English because it's old and pointless teachers are quick to argue; but when the new curriculum has been designed to help teachers fight this nasty misconception, they show just as much disproval as those pessimistic kids? Well . . . Pssst! It really isn't asking too much. Look closely and you'll see that the new curriculum most likely just articulates and "expects" things that we're already doing. So, take a deep breath, relax and embrace what is only natural and necessary . . . Evolution. Note: this is not the first time the curriculum has been revised my friends!

What this all means . . .

The overall curriculum expectations have not for the most part "changed" in the study of English. The 2007 curriculum documents have been, as it is directly stated, "revised." What this entails is a redefining, a re-wording of how we as English teachers meet the same expectations that have been in place for decades. Furthermore, in keeping with the current trends in society, the curriculum has become more specific and strategic in helping us to meet these expectations by introducing new mediums through which we can obtain these long-standing English standards and expectations. To put it simply, rather than meeting say 10 specific expectations through the same medium time and time again, we can now meet those expectations through a variety of mediums which appeal to the modern day adolescent. Which, most teachers have attempted to do prior to the introduction of these expectations anyways. Therefore, the new curriculum truly assists teachers to make better connections with students as expectations are being met.

The Study of English

Alright, so there is some truth to the introductory "student rant." There are many aspects of English that do remain constant. The plots of stories and Shakespearean plays have not and will not change, nouns are still nouns, we do enforce the fundamental writing structures and expect students to communicate orally. But, this is not what English is all about. This is not English at its "full integrity." The purpose of reading novels and plays is not to "get" the plot. The purpose of writing is to not formulaically put words together and speaking has never been about reading out loud or memorizing something that has been written in advance. Correct me if I am wrong; but, the study of English is about understanding meaning; discovering and exploring themes; contextualizing; provoking thought; expressing ideas; analyzing; discussing; making connections between fiction and the world around us; reflecting; investigating how and why we communicate; and finally creating. This, is English!

"New" Expectations

The most predominantly noticeable modification in the 2007 Revised English Curriculum is the re-structuring of strands. In 1999 the curriculum consisted of 4 strands. Now, in 2007, the curriculum still consists of 4 strands. These strands now being: Oral Communication, Reading and Literature Studies, Writing and Media Studies. In the grand scheme of things, this means that there hasn't been a strand added, it means that the strands have been revised to accommodate the study of media which was already seeping into the previous strands.

Why Media?

Take a look around and I think the better question would be, "Why not media?" Everyday, people everywhere are being bombarded by the media. Films, songs, video games, action figures, advertisements, CD covers, clothing, billboards, television shows, magazines, newspapers, photographs and websites . . . This is the world we live in, this is the world around us (English Curriculum 2007). As the study of English would traditionally suggest, explore it! Thus, the inclusion of the Media Studies strand has been added to the study of English as a means in which to break down, analyze and understand how and why these works are constructed. The focus of Media Studies is on the art, meaning, and messaging of various forms of media texts (2007) This is not altogether different than how we approach a novel, short story, poem or play. Moreover, media texts can be understood to include any work, object, or event that communicates meaning to an audience. Most media texts use words, graphics, sounds, and/or images, in print, oral, visual, or electronic form, to communicate information and ideas to their audience (2007). In essence, English has already had a long-standing history of exploring such texts; it's just now however, it has been labeled as such. Next, Media Studies explores the impact and influence of mass media and popular culture (2007). English has always been concerned with the influences of society! Finally, Media Studies has been incorporated to develop students media literacy skills, by allowing students opportunities to view, analyze and discuss a wide variety of media texts as they relate to their own experience. In other words, the objectives of student learning in English have not changed; but rather, it has become more than acceptable, it has become the standard to meet these expectations through the practice of utilizing the words messages that encompass our daily lives and not just select classic works of Literature.

Need more proof?

Here are the Grade 9 Academic Overall Expectations of Media Studies:

1. Understanding Media Texts: demonstrate an understanding of a variety of media texts;
2. Understanding Media Forms, Conventions, and Techniques: identify some media forms and explain how the conventions and techniques associated with them are used to create meaning;
3. Creating Media Texts: create a variety of media texts for different purposes and audiences, using appropriate forms, conventions, and techniques;
4. Reflecting on Skills and Strategies: reflect on and identify their strengths as media interpreters and creators, areas for improvement, and the strategies they found most helpful in understanding and creating media texts.

And here are suggestions as to how we can meet them:

• Schedule special time for media, make it something students can look forward to: Just as many teachers designate time for reading (such as the first 15 minutes of classes), set aside time to focus on media. I have often used the gimmick "Media Friday" and each Friday we incorporate at least one activity to Media.


• Empower the students: Have students brainstorm ideas about what they think media is. Have them bring in examples to discuss what they already know about media texts. Chances are they know A LOT!


• Presentations: In groups, allow students to pick a specific form of media such as magazines, television commercials, music lyrics, etc., and have them present it to the class by providing multiple examples. Ask them to describe what conventions make up the "text" such as words and illustrations as well as techniques such bright colours or catchy slogans. Then, get students to create their own (in-class) and follow up on them by asking students why they chose to use certain convention and techniques to create a message. This allows students to reflect on their work and identify the best strategies in "manipulating" audiences.


• Mix it up: Media doesn't always have to be viewed independently. If that's not your style incorporate the creation of media into the evaluation of other strands. Have students design posters for novels, websites for themes, MySpace or Facebook pages for character sketches, blogs for writing exercises, songs for poetry, etc, etc.

Ideas just not enough . . . Need something concrete?

An invaluable website on Media Literacy by the Media Awareness Network: http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/teachers/media_literacy/media_ed_approaches.cfm offers approaches, key concepts, assessment and evaluation tools.

The English Language Arts Network: http://www.elan.on.ca/Links/media.htm offers a wide variety of activities and lesson plans.

Exemplars: http://harrypotter-and-thedeathlyhallows.piczo.com/?g=47171792&vsrc=preview&cr=4 & http://vampirekissesxo.piczo.com/?g=1&cr=1 of student designed webpages for ISU novels.

Additional Crowding?

Of course, the inclusion of the Media Studies Strand is not the only reason why many complain that the curriculum is crowded. Other issues which impede on teacher accountability and make reaching all of the expectations harder to meet in 110 hours include (but are not limited to) Character Education and prepartion for the OSSLT. In the past year it has been a school wide initiative to address Character Education and assist students in preparing for the Grade 10 Literacy Test. However, I'm of the opinion that Character Education is something that is already addressed in English and thus taking whole days away from students in class to accomodate crash-courses on how to be a better person may not be serving this issue justice. Moreover, the same is done with the OSSLT, non-English teachers are asked to give up class time in order to "teach literacy" on a whim. With less initiatives like these, we'd have more opporunities to actully TEACH those 110 hours and in doing so, address Character Education and Literacy daily. Regardless, there will always be those pessimists who resist change or complain about how there just isn't enough time to fulfill their duties. However, if you set yourself up to fail, if you believe you can't do it, chances are you won't and you will fail, so think positively. Sound familiar? That's right, I'm sure you've uttered those words to students before . . . So, take your own advice, us teachers are a determined capable group who can take on anything! Consider the curriculum nice and cozy . . .

Character Education: http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/orbit/citizen_editorial.html

Ontario vs Saskatchewan . . .

A Comparative Research Assignment

Understanding the vision of accountability in English within my school, board and province has its merits; however, how do our measures of accountability in Ontario equate to our surrounding neighbours throughout Canada? In essence, there is great value in locating and considering what aspects of accountability best serve and support the full integrity of study in English from province to province. Thus, in order to obtain a better understanding and validation of Ontario’s study of English and accountability, I’ve examined it in comparison to that of Saskatchewan’s. The guiding elements of accountability in which I used to assist in my research include: system and diploma requirements, time on task, streaming, standards and testing.

System and Diploma Requirements

Before investigating the specific elements of accountability in English, I thought it necessary to first acquire more knowledge of the Saskatchewan education system and requirements. To review, students in Ontario begin Secondary School in Grade 9. It is expected that students earn 8 credits a year revolving around 2 semesters (4 credits per semester). Thereby, each student must complete 30 credits to receive their Ontario Secondary School Diploma. In Saskatchewan, students do not begin Secondary School until Grade 10. As a result, only 24 credits are required to be obtained for Secondary Level Completion. Like Ontario, the Saskatchewan school year revolves around 2 semesters as well. Overall, this means that students are earning the same amount of credits per year in Ontario as they are in Saskatchewan, but the culminating number of credits varies solely on the fact that credits are earned at the secondary level one year earlier in Ontario than Saskatchewan. Therefore, in numerical terms, the requirements for a "High School Diploma" in Ontario and Saskatchewan are equal.

Time on Task

Despite the similarity in semester rotations and credit requirements, there is an immense difference in the amount of time spent studying English in Ontario and Saskatchewan. In Ontario, students are required to complete 1 English credit at each grade level. Each credit is earned after completing a single course in any given semester. The time allotted to each course in Ontario is 110 hours adding up to a total of 440 hours of English for students in Ontario. In Saskatchewan, students are required to obtain 5 credits in English. Students must obtain 2 credits in their Grade 10 year, 1 credit in their Grade 11 year and 2 more in their Grade 12 year. Additionally, each course revolves around 2 thematic units each outlined to be fulfilled in 50 hours. Thus, each Saskatchewan English course equates to 100 hours. Therefore 5 credits at 100 hours add up to a total of 500 hours of English study. Additionally, consideration must be made to the fact that Saskatchewan’s 500 hours of English takes place in only 3 years whereby Ontario’s 440 hours is completed in 4 years. For further clarification of the time spent studying English in each of the provinces compared, refer to the chart below:


Streaming

In Ontario we implement the practice of streaming in English. In layman’s terms, this means, we teach students of varying academic backgrounds in different classes beginning in Grade 9. To further explain, when students enter Secondary School in Ontario they are advised by their Elementary School teachers to study in a particular stream based on their success in Elementary School. There are 3 streams in place for junior students: Locally Developed or Essential, Applied and Academic. These streams are in place to prepare students for the transition into the senior streams: Workplace, College and University. Evidently, the senior level streams are designed for students to prepare for their post-secondary goals and ambitions.

Saskatchewan on the other hand, does not implement streaming. Therefore, the English credits that must be earned in order to achieve Secondary Level Completion must be fulfilled at the same level by all students.

There are many benefits to the practice of streaming. First off, students are not placed in specified streams; they are given the option to choose between the three options based on their achievement level, personal interests and post secondary aspirations. Thus, students entering Secondary School with a low level of achievement in English have the opportunity to work in a class without students who have previously excelled in the subject area. Therefore, these students who struggled with English, found it challenging, or have been identified as having specialized learning needs, enter the Locally Developed / Essential stream. This stream features smaller class sizes, greater focus on the fundamentals of English and material that is more comprehensible to those with learning difficulties. Additionally, material is covered over a longer period of time in the Essential level than in the Applied or Academic streams. As a result, students are less likely to be “lost in the shuffle.” Moreover, with the material being geared toward their learning abilities they have a greater chance of success and can receive marks in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s which often boosts their self-esteem from having received low and failing grades in Elementary School. In the end, these students of the Locally Developed stream graduate with the skills necessary for the workplace. Another benefit to streaming is that students often choose between the Applied and Academic levels based on their interests or post secondary goals. The Applied level which becomes the College stream in senior years focuses on practical, concrete and creative skills that will essentially prepare them for success in College. Then, the Academic through University stream has a greater focus on abstract thought as well as theory and of course, prepares students with the appropriate skills for University. Therefore, students of streaming receive specialized education based on their unique learning styles and long term goals.

Contrary to the benefits of streaming, there are also some drawbacks. Students have been known to feel isolated in streamed classes. It is not unheard of for students to consider those in Academic classes “smart” and students in Applied or Essential courses “dumb.” Such negative connotations can discredit any self-confidence gained within the classroom environment of streamed programming. Additionally, where streaming offers specialized teaching, it can be argued that de-streaming offers a more equitable approach; as all students experience learning at the same pace, with the same material, approaches and expectations. Thus, students who graduate from a de-streamed program have been offered the same opportunities and could pursue any post secondary option of their choice (providing they are successful). In other words, the most common complaint I have heard from parents of students in streamed programming, is validated here. That complaint being, that students often miss out on opportunities or “close doors” in regards to the possibility of attending University or College when these streams are not elected.

Overall, from an educator’s view-point, I find the streaming more effective for both teaching and learning. I understand the student dilemma and self-confidence issues that come into play in regards to being in a streamed program. However, I believe that there is greater value in the streamed program because there is direct assurance that students graduating from each stream are prepared for a specific post secondary plan. Thus, I feel accountability is better served in the streaming of English. However, the full integrity of English may be better served in a de-streamed program. Regardless, I do not believe that all students need to be exposed to all aspects of English. Moreover, the students who choose to, in a streamed program, study English at the Academic / University stream exceed the aspects of English addressed in de-streaming and as a result reach the full integrity of study.

Accordingly, it would appear I prefer Ontario’s model of streaming over Saskatchewan’s lack thereof. However, when comparing the two, one must consider the fact that Ontario and Saskatchewan possess inherit geographical and demographic difference. Thus, due to Saskatchewan’s vastly rural areas, there is less need to stream students as there are fewer students in general. Therefore their needs are better met in de-streamed classes than students of Ontario’s would be. In essence, each province seems to be implanting the best practice for the students of their region.

Standards

In Ontario we have 4 strands of Overall Learning Expectations in English, they are: Oral Communication, Reading and Literature Studies, Writing and Media Studies according to the Ministry of Education (2007). In Saskatchewan, they have 5 strands of what they call Foundational Objectives, they include: Speak, Listen, Read, Write and Represent and View according the Government of Saskatchewan (2004). In comparison, the strands are interchangeable. However, the difference between the standards in Ontario and Saskatchewan is that for each level of English in each grade the Overall Expectations in Ontario differ; whereas, the Foundational Objectives in English Language Arts remain constant throughout all grades in Saskatchewan. Thus, in comparing 2 compulsory courses it would be necessary to compare the multiple specific expectations of Ontario’s curriculum with the multitudinous specific Learning Outcomes of the Saskatchewan Guide. Moreover, the courses offered vary a great deal in accordance to the streaming of Ontario schools and the additional hours spent allotted to English Language Arts in Saskatchewan. However, the chart below offers a clear comparison of the fairly equal categorization yet altogether vague overall expectations for Grade 10 Academic English and the Foundational Objectives that would be in place for students in Grade 10 in Saskatchewan:



In addition to the Foundational Objectives in English Language Arts in Saskatchewan teachers are required to cover Core Curriculum Components including: Common Essential Learning (concepts, skills and attitudes), Communication, Numeracy, Critical and Creative Thinking, Personal and Social Value Skills, Technological Literacy, and Independent Learning. Additionally, English Language Arts in Saskatchewan incorporates what is called The Adaptive Dimension which encourages teachers:

. . . To make adjustments in approved educational programs to accommodate diversity in student learning needs. It includes those practices the teacher undertakes to make curriculum, instruction, and the learning environment meaningful and appropriate for each student (The Adaptive Dimension in Core Curriculum, Saskatchewan Education, 1992).

Overall, these Saskatchewan standards may seem like a lot to cover and could in essence take away from the full integrity of English which seems to be more direct in Ontario; however, one must take into account that in Saskatchewan they spend a great deal more time studying English. Moreover, it is not specifically English, it is English Language Arts.


Testing

In Ontario there is a great deal of responsibility placed on English teachers to help students obtain the reading and writing skills necessary to pass the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT). The OSSLT is designed to ensure literacy upon receiving an Ontario Secondary School Diploma (OSSD). The test is administered in Grade 10; however, students who are unsuccessful are given multiple opportunities to rewrite the test until they are successful. This would appear that Ontario English teachers are highly accountable for the success of students; yet, exceptions are granted to students who have been unsuccessful more than twice as they can earn a credit in the Ontario Literacy Course to meet the Ministry’s requirements for the OSSD. Thus, Ontario does implement standardized testing, but it is not altogether necessary to pass the test. In regards to testing skills or knowledge in Ontario classrooms, the curriculum suggests that students be tested in a variety of methods which, is similar to the testing approach of Saskatchewan, “Formal tests can be appropriate and useful assessment tools but, as with all classroom practices, there should be a variety of assessment techniques employed.” (2004) However, the Saskatchewan curriculum outlines classroom teacher accountability in greater depth by stating that:

Teachers, as reflective practitioners, should know what, why, and how they are using tests. Teachers should ask themselves questions such as the following:

• Have the students been taught how to prepare for and write a test?
• Have the students been given sufficient notice and information to prepare adequately (e.g., have they been told whether the test will be open book, essay, short answer)?
• Have students been taught the vocabulary of questions (e.g., compare, explain, etc.)?
• Have students been taught how to use reference materials (e.g., dictionary, language usage handbook) during a timed testing situation?
• Have adaptations for students with special needs been considered?
• Have students been informed of how they are going to be graded?

Yet, in consideration to standardized testing there is no current provincial wide literacy test. Nevertheless, if in grade 12 Saskatchewan students have been taught English by a non-accredited English teacher, it is required of them to complete a provincial exam as opposed to an in-class exam to ensure their knowledge and skills are at the same level as those who have been taught by accredited English teachers. The provincial exams are usually written by approximately 25% of Saskatchewan students.

Conclusion

Comparing the aspects of accountability in Ontario and Saskatchewan as it relates to the study of English has proven to be arduous. At the onset of my comparison, it seemed that Saskatchewan’s extensive time allotment to English would contribute to their study of the subject to reach its full integrity over Ontario. However, after examining streaming, the standards and testing, I would have to say that I am proud to be of the belief and understanding that we in Ontario do a better job of covering the far-reaching realms of English. That is not to say that Saskatchewan’s English curriculum is less effective than ours in Ontario. We in Ontario just seem to place greater emphasis on specific elements of English, while Saskatchewan’s approach is more general; and, in having a true passion for English, I would prefer to stay here in Ontario where I have course options which allow me to explore minute elements of the subject that I happen to find fascinating!

An Accountability Review

1. Accountability: Where Do Teachers Fit?

In this article, Lorna M. Earl Ph.D. examines teacher accountability from the perspective of the classroom rather than large-scale initiatives. Imagine that, looking at the roles and responsibilities of teachers from the place where they perform. What a reasonable, sensible and yet somehow innovative thing to do in the name of accountability.

Accountability: Where Do Teachers Fit is a fairly comprehensible and engaging read. For the most part, it is easy to make connections from Earl’s points to my own experiences. For example, she explains how accountability has resulted in, “professional morale” being at “an all time low and it is hard to rally energy to do the job.” As disheartening as this statement may be, it is very true. Teachers in my school feel that there is more pressure to have a high percentage of students pass than to actually learn.

Earl explains how most teachers entered the profession with a single goal in mind: “To enrich the lives of their students.” However, the impact of accountability has placed far too much emphasis on things such standardized testing that less time is spent in the classroom where, “The impact of teachers on a daily basis is profound and lasting, with the ultimate quality of education always hinging on effective teaching and learning.” Moreover, Earl addresses the inherent responsibility teachers have in developing solid relationships with students and parents. She argues that, “Parents send their most precious possessions to the schools to enhance their learning and their chances in life.” Well, how wonderful would it be if all parents really felt that way? If each student came from a home environment where the parents’ goal was that of the teacher’s developing those relationships would be simple. Unfortunately, not all parents value education and so “having a very direct responsibility to the students in [our] charge and to the parents of those students” is not always easy or even sought after by parents. In fact, I have encountered parents who obstruct relationships between students and teachers, promoting the idea that teachers and the education system are enemies. Regardless, I agree with Earl and believe these relationships are pertinent to student success and teacher accountability. I make an effort to communicate with the parents of my students at the onset of each semester by newsletter, telephone and recently through the internet; as I feel and have seen that these relationships or at least this communication enhances student achievement.

Earl also effectively outlines what teachers should be accountable for as professionals. She advocates that “individuals can only be held responsible for things which they have some control.” Thus she states that it is in my or any other teachers control to, “always be learning, growing and changing [our] conceptions of the world around [us], the role and nature of education, the material [we] teach and the implications for [our] daily activities.” Again, this sounds quite reasonable; I believe I should be held accountable for this. Accordingly, Earl explains that teachers should be responsible for ensuring that our knowledge is “current, accurate and comprehensive” in order to expend quality education. Moreover, she maintains that the learning teachers need to be accountable for includes:

• Understanding Learning
• Content Knowledge
• Pedagogical Understanding
• Emotional Understanding
• Fundamentals of Change
• Meta-Learning

Next, Earl explains how the goals of education have changed to “produce high levels of success for all of the diverse learners in schools.” In other words, that there is now a focus on equity. Initially, Earl attempts to disprove the North American belief that “inequality in education is largely a function of students’ innate abilities rather than the quality of schools and teachers.” She suggests that, “more affluent and privileged children get access to more skilled teachers, more challenging curriculum and have more opportunities to think or write.” However, I disagree with Earl on this point. I know many teachers who have taught in private schools which do in fact have more resources but do not necessarily have better teachers or more time for students to think and write. Moreover, the teachers I know who have had experience teaching in affluent schools were not teaching in their subject areas and commented on how students were less interested in learning and more interested in receiving high marks. As a result, the teachers were not happy in these schools and opted to teach in the public boards where they sought relief in equity.

Following this, Earl further examines the need for continuous communication between teachers, students and parents. She highlights the benefits of having respectful and open relationships where decisions can be made about future learning. Additionally, she discusses how “time in schools is well used when students are engaged with their learning, using their knowledge and interests and actively thinking about the issues at hand.” Therefore, costly devices which are often thought to enhance student learning are not always necessary if teachers are creating an effective learning environment. Again, this is something I strongly agree with. I have found that many departments fight for more money to have multiple projectors and SMART Boards, only to be used as glorified overheads. In other words, is it really necessary to put simple words that could be written on the chalkboard into a Power Point Presentation? Technologies like these are often overused and can be disengaging to students. Of course, I use these technologies, but I don’t find it necessary to use it every day. In fact, I find that students love to write on the chalkboard and they also love to use chart paper. I find that in a world where students utilize electronic devices daily, they find it exciting to be given something tangible and lucky for us teachers, cost-effective!

Finally, Earl concludes that “professional accountability is characterized by ongoing conversations” not limited to parent teacher interviews and report cards. She offers guidelines for helping teachers attend to their professional accountability and closes by saying, “Teachers can accomplish a great deal . . . To students and parents; for quality, equity, openness and efficiency in learning; through sustained and important conversations about students, about teaching and about learning.” Overall, I think she has done a great job bringing accountability back into the classroom and highlighting on the true aspects of our jobs which we should be accountable for.

Full Text Available Here

2. Accountability in Education

This paper was not as effortless to read as the previous article. However, Accountability in Education does do an excellent job of clearly defining what is meant by the term ‘accountability.’ The article states that “accountability is synonymous with responsible and is defined as “required to account for one’s conduct.” Additionally, a second definition is offered claiming that accountability is “an obligation to answer for how one’s assigned responsibilities have been carried out.” The first definition is one I would say best describes how I feel I should be accountable as a teacher. I believe my conduct in the classroom should be of a specific caliber. However, the latter definition suggests that I would be accountable for carrying out responsibilities that could possibly go beyond the teaching realm. Additionally, the second definition espouses a negative connotation. Nevertheless the accountability has been elucidated.

Accountability in Education offers suggestions for improving the accountability system as well as highlights some of the current flaws. The article addresses the fact that provincial assessments are designed mostly for students with academic aptitude. This is problematic as it “represents a very narrow span of children’s gifts, talents and potential” where “society is more dependant than ever on citizenry with a wide array of skills, knowledge and attitudes.” It is explained that “many believe that every student is unique and has preferred styles of learning that may not match the approaches used on standardized tests.” Moreover, the article continues to expound upon the fact that:

Standardized testing is designed to ignore or override external factors affecting individuals, such as poverty; parents’ educational level, mental, physical and emotional health; the effects of racial and other forms of discrimination; and language of origin during measurement.

However, the High School Diploma in itself is standardized. I believe that when a student receives their Diploma that it is assumed that student is both literate and numerate. In other words, you can’t earn something that is a standard without having met the standards. Furthermore, I believe that employers assume this ideology. When and where could a student get a job and not be expected to perform due to a factor such as emotional health? Of course, there are scenarios whereby employees are forgiven for such circumstances. However, where do we draw the line in regards to student accountability and “milking the system” so to speak?

Interestingly, this article also addresses the downfall of student focus on achieving high test scores. The example states:

When students focus on achieving high test scores, they are less likely to learn to their capacity, love learning and value creative thinking, accept mistakes as a normal part of learning and develop their unique learning styles.

Unfortunately, I’ve seen this first hand many times. Students have expressed concern for their learning and wish to improve their grades. Consequently, I take great care in writing in-depth comments on their work, provide examples and explain to them how they can improve their skills in order to improve their grades. Yet, surprisingly this is not what the students seem to want. It seems they want to express and interest in their concern for learning, but really, they just want high marks. As a result, they take little interest in the assessment and feedback of their work and repeat the same errors again and again. In fact, I am often insulted when I spend the time to write in-depth comments only to see them thrown in the trash once the overall percentage has been read. Perhaps a future plan of mine could be to hand back assignments without the rubric and mark until after students have re-examined their tasks. Nevertheless, to get back on track, I can see how see how the focus can be deterred from learning. Yet, it is known to students that the mark they receive on the OSSLT does not go on their record and it seems that academic students pay very little attention to this test. However, the teacher concern of time spent focusing on the topics for standardized tests are also addressed in this paper. It is stated that, “Time pressures contribute to a narrowing of the curriculum, as available time is focused on the topics that will be on the provincial test or examination.” However, I’ve taught many sections of Grade 10 English and have not found covering certain expectations of the OSSLT invasive of the curriculum. In fact, I use some of the OSSLT activities to help meet specific expectations and incorporate them into evaluations.

Next, this article presents an extensive context for an effective accountability system. The system includes four perspectives on accountability in education based on System Coherence and Program Integrity, it offers:

• Focus on highly standardized, selected learnings in core subjects
• Focus on broad goals of education
• Culture of Compliance: Contracts, regulations, controlling to ensure consistency
• Culture of Ingenuity: Shared values and goals, encouraging flexibility, building capacity

Overall, I find the idea behind this theory rather effective, yet the approach seems too scientific, less personal and very hard to apply to my own teaching.

Finally, Accountability in Education articulates 7 “Key Principals” of an effective accountability system. Those principals are:

1. Education partners have a shared understanding of and commitment to fairness, openness, respect for diversity and stewardship, key values underlying accountability in education.
2. The primary purpose of accountability in education is to support the broad goals of education and the diverse learning needs of children and youth.
3. Information for accountability purposes is gathered in a variety of ways from all relevant sources, and reported and used in ways that respect the limitations of the data.
4. Sound educational research and practice guide the design and implementation of an accountability system in education.
5. Accountability in education enhances the capacity of education partners to fulfill their respective roles and responsibilities and leads to sustained improvement of the system.
6. Each education partner is accountable for those areas of the system within its authority and expertise.
7. The system of accountability in education is evaluated on an ongoing basis.
   

Cumulatively, I feel that the principals outlined above are in fact, key in formulating effective accountability in education. Furthermore, this section of the article was much more reader-friendly and identifiable to current education practices; particularly, the outlining of responsibilities for all partners of education in Principle 6. Consequently, I would suggest that all personnel involved in education should read what their role entails according to Accountability in Education and see if they feel they’re fulfilling their duties.

Full Text Available Here

3. Hyde’s Key Issues:

Classroom Accountability

Placing emphasis on positive relationships between teachers and students; engaging individuals and encouraging personal growth and learning, not numeric success

Valuing the High School Diploma

Discouraging the “passing” of students who fail to meet expectations. Ensure that there is a standard expectation that students who possess a High School Diploma are literate, numerate and competent to work independently

Communication

Should be continuous and ongoing between students, teachers, parents and other educators such as guidance counselors and resource teachers

Pennywise

Spend money wisely. Do not make frivolous purchases on technologies that are no more effective than what is already in our possession

Collaboration

Bridging the gap between teachers and policy makers

The Rubber Hits the Road . . . Leadership Project

1. The Case:

The recent tension in the Orchard Park Secondary School English Department has been the unfortunate result of inconsistent practices among colleagues. Although each teacher in the department is required to distribute and go over the longstanding policy on late assignments at some point during the first or second day of classes; it seems that not all teachers follow through with these procedures as the semester wears on. At this time, students have raised awareness that the penalties for late and non submission of work are not being addressed fairly from teacher to teacher. Thus, students in “Ms. Comma’s” class are handing in assignments at any time without any repercussions; while, “Mr. Apostrophe” struggles to stick to the policy as closely as possible and “Miss. Hyphen” will not accept anything passed its due date, as well as distributes automatic zero’s to students who miss assignments. When the Department Head, “Mrs. Parenthesis” confronted each teacher in regards to the policy, she realized that this has been an ongoing problem for the past few years and it is evidently an issue that is persistently rearing its head from semester to semester. Each teacher believes their practice is the best practice and now, the tension is so thick in the Department it could metaphorically, be sliced.

2. The Context:

Interestingly, I’ve searched through the Education Act, the Ontario Ministry of Education’s website as well as the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board’s policies and was surprised to find absolutely no written procedure or protocol in accordance with student’s late or non submission of work. In essence, the “Culture of Responsibility Policy” that teachers and administrators of our board often speak of, appears to be somewhat of a myth. The “Culture of Responsibility” does not refer to a policy but to an undocumented and undefined expression whereby no procedure is actually in place. Consequently, that means students can argue that teachers are not allowed to assign zero’s as much as teachers may argue they can. In Orchard Park Secondary School’s Student Agenda under the Academic Policies heading, it is cited that, “A 'culture of responsibility' is the guiding principle used by teachers at Orchard Park Secondary School to determine the reasonableness and fairness of accepting late work and missed tests. Each department within Orchard Park Secondary School will have a Culture of Responsibility statement” (30). Accordingly, the English Department’s statement decrees:

The policy on late assignments will be in accordance with the philosophy of the ‘student culture of responsibility’ which takes into account what is reasonable and fair under the circumstances, both to the student with the late assignment, and to students who have followed expectations.

Thus, it appears that it is indeed up to the teacher’s discretion to evaluate whether or not students work should be accepted and how to deal with the submissions. Moreover, the teacher’s discretion is further reiterated in accordance to The Ontario Secondary Schools 9-12: Program and Diploma Requirements document from the Ministry of Education which merely states in section 6.2.1:

The primary purpose of assessment and evaluation is to improve student learning . . . In order to ensure that assessment and evaluation are valid and reliable, and they lead to the improvement of student learning, teachers must use assessment and evaluation strategies that: Are fair to all students. (1999)

In addition to the teachers’ responsibilities to assess and evaluate students work fairly, the English Department’s Late Policy further states:

1. Students should submit assignments by the indicated due date, including those days when they are absent from class for other school activities.

2. Assignments completed and submitted on time will be both assessed (receive comments to assist with student learning) and evaluated (receive numerical mark).

3. Assignments submitted after students’ assignments have been handed back will be accepted only for assessment (receive comments to assist with student learning). See #5.

4. Teachers will use their professional judgment in regard to whether to accept a late assignment for evaluation, in consideration of fairness and reasonableness.

5. If a teacher decides out of fairness and reasonableness to accept an assignment for evaluation after other assignments have been handed back to students, then the assignment topic must be changed while retaining equivalent expectations and level of difficulty.

Moreover, the English Department’s Missed Tests, Presentations, Class Work and Exams Policy states:

1. Students are responsible for making prior arrangements for tests to be missed because of school activities or other legitimate pre-arranged absences.

2. It is the student’s responsibility to make up missed work de to absences.

3. It is the student’s responsibility to make up a missed test. A missed test will be made up according to the teacher’s professional judgment and in consideration of what is fair and reasonable.

4. A student will receive a mark of “0” (zero) on any assignment or test missed due to skipping.

5. Missed examinations will be dealt with according to school policy.

6. A teacher may require, at his/her professional judgment and discretion, for a below standard (i.e. below Level One), assignment to be rewritten until the quality of the style and content is acceptable. The final mark awarded will be the average of the mark for the first attempt and the mark of the final attempt, but not less than 50%. (Recall the final attempt must be “to standard.”)

Therefore, the policies and documents within Orchard Park Secondary School, the Hamilton-Wentworth Board of Education and the Ministry of Education do not project a clear procedure, protocol or even vision as to how teachers are to equally judge what is fair and reasonable.

3. Leadership:

As Dr. Chris Spence, Director of Education for the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board once proclaimed, “Leaders turn challenging situations into success.” They “put together programs and policies that will create a ‘culture of success,’” and this is exactly what is needed in this case specific situation. Dr Chris Spence also explained that leaders “always anticipate change” as well as, “welcome new ideas and challenges.” Evidently, the policies in place at Orchard Park Secondary School are not creating a ‘culture of success’ if the teachers are experiencing tension and the students feel they are being treated unfairly. As a result, changes need to be made in the Department and the old policies need to be revisited to ensure clarity and consistency.

The leadership qualities and skills that are needed to implement these changes are outlined best in the Competency Self-Assessment Worksheet from the Alberta Public Service Resource Plan. They include: Adaptability, Communication, Problem Solving and Judgment as well as Teamwork (HayGroup). Tackling this situation requires one to be able to adapt and be willing to change their procedures in order to devise an effective policy for all teachers and students. This will require being able to clearly communicate ideas with colleagues by listening, interpreting, formulating and delivering ideas face-to-face and in writing for the purpose of composing an unambiguous policy. In doing so, it is necessary to have the ability to assess options and implications, in order to identify a solution through problem solving. Finally, none of this can be done without the ability to work co-operatively and productively with others in order to achieve results.

Finally, the style of leadership that is best suited for this problem, as derived from Donald Clark’s Leadership Style Survey, would be the Participative Style. This style of leadership takes many individuals’ points of view into account. Participative leadership stems from the democratic method and considering this issue has developed into a problem due to individual teachers’ varying practices, it makes the most sense to examine and discuss each practice and collaborate with the additional members of the department to see what the best practice according to what is “fair and reasonable to all students” really is.

4. The Plan:

Although the problem outlined is the result of colleagues failing to practice consistent policies in regards to late and non submission assignments, the best solution as I see it, is to collaboratively address the longstanding ambiguous policy and revise it so there is less room for interpretation. As it stands, the Academic Policies of Orchard Park Secondary School clearly state that each Department shall have their own “culture of responsibility” statement. Therefore, it is fair to say that the English Department has full reign over establishing an unambiguous policy so long as it adheres to the Ministry of Education’s clause to evaluate and assess reasonably and fairly. Thus, the process could essentially begin and end within the English Department.

From a leadership standpoint, I would:

1. Discuss with my Department Head that I have a solution to propose for this consistent problem and would like to address it in a Department Meeting.

2. At the meeting I would bring attention to the problem of students claiming to be treated unfairly and identifying the unclear nature of our current policy, which is of course ambiguous and outdated (no one in the Department seems to know when it was established and that within itself expresses a lot considering there are teachers who have been there for over 20 years).

3. I would stress that no teacher is at fault for the problem, but that the policy is simply ambiguous. Furthermore, I would place emphasis on the idea that it is necessary for the entire department to work together in sharing ideas, addressing problems and concerns in order to devise a plan to establish a new policy that we could all be content with.

4. Providing my idea to revise the policy is approved, I would then suggest that any teachers who would like to be directly involved in the revising and rewriting of the policy could join a committee (not limited to any number - all English teachers could potentially join) headed by myself to rewrite the policy with consideration made to the points addressed in the meeting.

5. The committee would then work to create a first draft of the policy to distribute to each department member for feedback before composing a second, third, fourth or however many drafts it takes to make sure that all members of the department approve the new policy.

6.The policy could then be approved (though it is not necessary) by administration and put into place at the onset of the following semester.

Plagiarism

This 1 word. These 4 syllables, are enough to set any teenager off into yawns and moans. For some reason, the negative connotation encompassing plagiarism has nothing to do with the seriousness of the offense but with the dryness of the topic.

You see, at Orchard Park Secondary School where I teach, learning about plagiarism can often become repetitive for students. Unfortunately, this redundancy does not mean my school is free and clear of plagiarism offenses.

OP's Plagiarism Policies . . .

At the onset of each semester, in each grade of each English course, teachers at my school are required to complete at least 2 lessons followed up by 2 quizzes or activites in the first 2 weeks of school. The lessons include: defining plagiarism and its various types, providing examples (mostly written but I've now included some pop-culture in my lessons with Avril Lavigne's recent case in regards to her song "Girlfriend"), demonstrating how to paraphrase, how to cite and how to avoid plagiarizing. The activities and quizzes used to follow up on these lessons are to prove that students understand plagiarism and are aware of the consequences. In addition to this, students make corrections to any possible errors in these tasks and then sign and date a form stating that they've recieved the lessons, completed the activites and that they fully comprehend the consequences. Now, the consequences are simple. If a student is caught plagiarizing they automatically recieve a zero on the assignment, their name goes in our Department's "P" File, a VP is made aware of the occurance and their parents are notified while the student and teacher partake in a conference. Of course, this may sound harsh, but remember the student did attend 2 lessons, 2 activites and signed a written contract prior to the offense.

Plagiarism Resources . . .

So . . . When searching sites for resources on plagiarism I asked myself this question: What can I do to make my lessons more exciting? Here's what I found . . . This is a humourous video which I thought could be used as a teaching tool in conjunction with my lessons and activities to help students understand how plagiarism infringes upon copyright . . . Plagiarism is stealing! But this, this video is not . . . Enjoy!



A permanent link is located in my "Link List" somwhere over ------>
Or here: http://www.teachertube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=2062843ef543e21d7ec8

Introducing . . . Sherry-Lynn Hyde

Welcome to my blog!

I'm a Secondary School Drama & English teacher in The Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board. At present, I'm taking my Honours Specialist at Brock University and am utilizing this blog as part of my Professional Growth . . .