Advisories & School Change
Many secondary schools use Advisory Programs in some way, shape, or form. The following draft was written almost 15 years ago, when I was trying to get Bronxville High School (in Westchester County, New York) to consider adopting a new form of Advisory Program which would not only empower students (and teachers) but would transform the school itself as a site of learning. Needless to say, the plan was not adopted but I believe it still has a great deal of merit and would love to re-engage people in a discussion about how Advisories could be used to effectively change schools and school culture.
Giving the Kids the Keys:
Using Advisories as a Vehicle for Change
1. The Metaphor
One of the most significant rites of passage in American society occurs when an adolescent earns a driver's license. It is the first status symbol of adulthood, a first step into the "grown-up's" world. To obtain it kids are willing to learn facts and regulations they might not otherwise have cared about; they are willing to humble themselves as lurching and uncertain apprentices in the presence of those who already have the skills; they will take the test again and again until they meet the standards of the authorities. And, once behind the wheel, the teen-ager is given status equal to adults — with all the rights and responsibilities that accompany the license to drive.
Schools, on the other hand, are reluctant to view their charges as adults. Indeed, our school culture typically extends childhood right up to the moment a high school diploma is in hand or a final bag is unpacked in some campus dormitory, or a person shows up for their first day of work – or at boot camp. When it comes to making important decisions about what they learn and how, we keep our high school students in their (long-obsolete) "place" — passively going along for the ride, almost never actively participating in getting themselves toward their goal.
This curriculum development proposal challenges that idea. It suggests that students "get behind the wheel" early on in their high school career; that they be challenged with the rigors and responsibilities, the curves in the road, the starts and stops that adults face. It assumes there is a goal the teen-agers want to reach — an intellectual rite of passage as important as the license to drive. And, in much the same way that a learner's permit allows them to develop the skills of driving under the tutelage of a responsible adult, it gives them a framework in which they can take gradual responsibility for their own success — a system of performance tasks, initially in a coached and guided environment, but finally on their own — before they receive the diploma, before they leave home.
Schools with an advisory system already in place could begin using this framework almost immediately. In a regularly scheduled, class-length advisory period (for example, two 45-50 minute class periods per week), students can be handed the keys to their own future, encouraged to investigate and reflect upon what their schooling is about and, ultimately, prove themselves in the "road test" of a Graduation Exhibition.
Teachers and advisers play an important role in this process. We don't let the novice driver take the road test before (s)he is ready and before we, as adults, think they have proved themselves ready. This proposal delineates how we can help our students learn-to-learn, how we can thoughtfully and carefully instruct young people to put the pieces of their curricular jigsaw puzzle into place so they have a much clearer picture of what their school experience is about. Finally, this proposal asks that young people demonstrate in concrete ways what sense they have made of the world. Like proud but concerned parents, we can then hand over the keys, allowing the students to show us they understand the rules of the road and have mastered the skills to drive off, by themselves, into the future.
2. Bottom-up & Inside Out: The setting and process for change
Let's examine how students might "learn to drive" their own education by examining a case study. Imagine a "good" suburban high school which has been in the process of lurching change — there is some interdisciplinary teaching going on, the students have a genuinely empowered governing body, teachers have identified some general "Exit Outcomes." and there is an advisory system. There has been talk of Site-Based Management, Shared Decision-Making, as well as Graduation Exhibitions and, of course, committees have been created to examine each of those topics. So, while there is no tidal wave of sentiment for "change" among the faculty (the "it ain't broke, why fix it" mentality pervades a certain segment of the teaching staff), there are initiatives afoot. The question confronting those who advocate change is: how can any of the initiatives be used to genuinely push the school in new and productive directions which will benefit the students, faculty, and, ultimately, the community? The advisory program may provide the answer.
The advisory program in this case has been problematic throughout its history at the school. While part of its design has been to work in conjunction with the student governing organization (essentially serving as plenary sessions for democratic decision-making), there has been concern over the curriculum of the advisories — that it is "soft," that Guidance uses it for administrivia,that teachers are unsure of what the focus of the program is. The recommendation here is to revise the advisory system's curriculum so that students and teachers become active participants in examining the school, its goals, and the proposed Exit Outcomes. This revision is unique because it does not follow the common paths of "top-down" mandates from administration or the piecemeal initiatives introduced by outside consultants or small groups of teachers (this is sometimes erroneously seen or referred to as "bottom up" change). Rather, this proposal is more an "inside out" strategy for change — one in which students and teachers engage in collaborative inquiry through the vehicle of the existing advisory program. By systematically investigating topics which question the nature of schooling — its patterns, its connections and disconnections, its disciplines— the advisory can serve as a source of meaningful inquiry for students and teachers.
If the existing advisory program consists of two meetings per week, or two meetings per cycle in a multi-day rotating schedule, this proposal recommends that a new advisory curriculum be conceived of in {a minimum of} four-session "learning experiences." In a forty-week school year, then, the advisory curriculum would consist of five-to-ten major "learning experiences" and each of these would be designed around a specific, consistent framework. That framework would have four essential components:
1) a series of proposed topics and/or themes;
2) Essential Questions which are designed to provoke inquiry by students and teachers, developmentally driving the program forward and focused on constructing knowledge through collaborative inquiry;
3) an activities "menu" from which advisory groups can pick and choose how they want to investigate ideas and pursue essential questions;
4) assessments, connected to the activities — pushing the inquiry deeper and requiring student demonstrations of understanding and critical reflection.
Since the advisory program is not in the purview of any one department or discipline, it becomes the ideal setting for inquiry and reflection into the nature and purpose of schooling. It can use the methods, styles, and activities from all the disciplines and, in that sense, can be very liberating for all concerned. Because it is a new endeavor, however, it will take some time for people to truly understand the process and purpose of the advisory and its role in the larger curriculum. Several key ideas must be understood before any work proceeds in the advisory. First and foremost, everyone involved must see that one of the advisory's purposes is to put knowledge from content area courses to use . That is, the advisory will become a place where students will analyze, evaluate, and synthesize their discipline-based course work, looking for connections between courses and content areas, seeing how the knowledge applies or transfers to other ("real-world?") situations, and so on. Another key facet of the advisory will be the very conscious awareness of the Exit Outcomes which have been identified. In this case study, the Outcomes which the faculty have developed are that students will demonstrate the characteristics of complex thinkers, innovative producers, collaborative contributors, self-directed achievers, effective communicators, and involved citizens. Finally, a known expectation will be that, by Senior Year, students will clearly show what they know and can do through their performance in a Graduation Exhibition; a demonstration which illustrates they have, in fact, genuinely probed deeply the ideas beneath the stated Exit Outcomes and have internalized those concepts to the point where they can publicly present what they know and can do to the community. The advisory program itself, in fact, becomes a weekly demonstration of students incorporating the concepts identified in the Exit Outcomes through student/teacher inquiry, activity, and assessment. The design of the advisory program, then, is intentionally focused on developmentally moving students and teachers through investigations of the patterns, systems, and connections in the school, as well as a deliberate, in-depth probe of the stated Exit Outcomes with the goal of publicly exhibiting their knowledge, skills, and abilities through a final Graduation Exhibition.
An advisory program designed this way — or an existing advisory which incorporates this model — can promote significant change in a high school in the most fundamentally profound ways. Because it asks the students and teachers to inquire together about the nature and purpose of schooling it is not only a genuine "bottom-up" change, but it is also an inside-out change — one wrought from the actual participants and their experiences and perceptions as school is happening. This program incorporates a questioning and understanding of the very structure of the system in which the students and teachers are a part, making it a meaningfully authentic experience at every point along the way. As important, it is designed to culminate in a most demonstrable form of accountability — students will design, research, and publicly present their Senior Exhibitions based on what they have learned and experienced in school as mediated by the advisory program.
3. Why use Advisories as Vehicles for Change?
Most advisory systems which are in place serve very clear affective needs for students. This proposal does not ask that those goals be dispensed with. Indeed, the number of meetings and how they might be used is always the decision of the school and its community. What is proposed here is that advisories be given the possibility of adding a significant cognitive component which can easily be incorporated in the existing structure of the school without disrupting anything that is already going on! Without threatening any of the departmental territory that exists, without making any demands for interdisciplinary teaming, without suggesting that anyone begin using alternative assessments, this advisory program proposal is designed to allow students to actively understand and investigate what their schooling is about. It fosters engagement on the part of students and teachers involved in the program and provoke hard questioning about the nature and purpose of school, curriculum design, district priorities and decisions, and so on. It is designed to make the students agents of accountability, in a sense, because they will become the people who scrupulously probe the disciplines, the exit outcomes, the very mechanics of school. It asks the students to find the connections in the curriculum, to root out the disconnectedness, and to positively propose how things might be done better. And then it asks them to "show what they know" through their Senior Exhibition. This is a risky proposition, certainly, because it requires that the school be willing to invite its students to question its very workings. But it demands that students work thoroughly and creatively, that they ask reasonable questions and propose significant hypotheses, that they, in fact, demonstrate those habits of mind which the school and its community purportedly value in the stated Exit Outcomes. If, in fact, the school is not willing to undergo this kind of scrutiny from its students, why should young people believe that inquiry and thoroughness is valued in our society? Indeed, this proposal invites the school to "practice what it preaches" and throw a truly challenging gauntlet at the feet of its students with the understanding that "friendly" criticism and healthy inquiry are the heart and soul of a rigorous and demanding education.
4. Logistics & Format
For the purpose of illustration, the model used here will be an advisory program which meets in a school using an 8-day rotating cycle (see Appendix A). The advisories meet twice during every 8-day rotation with a planning period set aside for teachers of advisories. In a 40 week school year there are, then, twenty to twenty-five cycles during which advisories can meet. The proposed plan incorporates the idea that advisories would meet twenty times, allowing for other activities, "spill-over" time on some projects, or unforeseen events (fire drills, assembly programs, snow days, whatever). Schools that have advisories meeting more frequently could conceivably expand the program detailed below, use other time for more affective-oriented activities, or incorporate other school activities or functions in the time. The point here is that any school with an existing advisory program should be able to adapt this proposal as it sees fit — if their goals for their advisory coincide with (or are close to) those stated here. The format for meetings, then, in this proposed system is two 45-50 minute periods each cycle. The curriculum design is to consider every two cycles (four 45-50 minute meetings) ONE "learning experience/topic-theme area."
5. Curricular Goals
The advisory program would have a number of clear goals, all of which should reinforce not only the Exit Outcomes but also reflect those goals most teachers and departments of content-discipline areas have for their students. These would include:
• an ability to work independently
• an ability to work with a variety of people in collaborative settings
• the development of poise and self-confidence
• demonstrations of respect for others and their work
• the ability to develop hypotheses and clearly identify problems
• the ability to manage time effectively
• the ability to use a variety of resources - technical, human, etc.
• the ability to do basic and complex research
• the ability to communicate articulately in writing and speech
• the ability to further clarify communication through visual media
or other means
• the ability to self-reflect, self-assess and self-correct
• the ability to listen effectively and give constructive feedback
• the ability to see and make connections between disciplines
• the ability to apply, synthesize, analyze, evaluate the content
knowledge acquired in coursework.
A daunting list, possibly, if one did not recognize that we are talking about the development and achievement of these skills and abilities over the entire span of a student's career. What will become apparent is that these goals are addressed throughout the advisory program curriculum delineated below. There is a consistent focus on the development of these skills and abilities through the use of course content knowledge and the reflection upon that use by students.
6. Activities and Assessment Design
An essential element of the advisory program proposed here is that the activities and assessment design incorporate the content/knowledge students are involved with in their course work. The advisory would, in a sense, become a "production shop" for the knowledge "consumed" throughout the school day.[1] Again, because the advisory is not "owned" by any particular department or discipline area it can use the resources, techniques, styles, and methods from the entire panoply of courses. Students in advisory, then, might find themselves engaged in Socratic Seminars, lab work, using manipulatives, simulating debates, and so on. The key to well-designed activities is that they be inherently woven into assessments that reveal where students are in their continuum of development toward the curricular goals listed above. To aid in monitoring that progress, student journals or logs would be a vital component of the advisory program. In such a journal students could document not only what is going on in their advisory program but also what and how they are thinking about it, reacting to it, provoked by it, making connections from it. The following, then, is step by step articulation of an advisory program designed to promote inquiry and deepen student understanding of their own educational journey. It should be seen as a "menu," if you will, for interested teachers, students, administrators, et al, to examine and pick and choose from. How the proposal is used or adapted is entirely dependent upon the needs of those who are using it or adapting it. Nothing is cast in stone here. As with one's education, it is a continually unfolding process.
7. Focusing on Outcomes, Examining One's Education
Topic 1. Systems
Essential Questions: • What is the nature of a system? • How do we discover understand how systems work? • How is (or isn't) school a system? •What makes a system successful?•What would a Graduation-by-Exhibition system look like?
• How can we devise a grading system which is genuinely fair?
Activities/Assessments: Create a system — or a systematic approach to things — which would help a Middle School student understand how the High School works. This could be a written handbook, a video, a prepared address by an individual or group, a chart or visual aid which clearly delineates the system and how it works.
Topic 2. Patterns
Essential Questions: •Distinguish between the patterns of man and the
patterns of nature. Are there connections between the two? If so,
what are they? • How does understanding patterns help an
individual? Give an example. • What personal patterns do you
have? Do schools have patterns? If so, what are they?
Activities/Assessments: Group or individual — design or create a product
which illustrates your understanding of patterns (you may use music,
art, math, science, phys. ed, etc. -- or any combination of subject areas).
• Create a physical pattern using members of the class. Can you devise
a physical pattern which also illustrates the working of a system? See
how the class interprets it.
Topic 3. Connections
Essential Questions: • How are things related to/connected to each other?
• What does it mean to be "connected?" • Within the school day,
what is connected and what is disconnected? • What are the
advantages/disadvantages of seeing/not seeing connections between
things?
Activities/Assessments: Chart/map your courses — indicate where things
connect and where there are gaps. What connections can you make
between what you learned in elementary and middle school — where
were there gaps and why? Between Middle School and High School
(so far)? Be prepared to explain your conclusions in writing, orally,
with visual aids, etc.
Topic 4. Investigating Outcomes: Complex Thinker
Essential Questions: • What is the difference between "complex" and
"complicated?" • Who do you know whom you would consider
a complex thinker? • What do complex thinkers do — as jobs; as
processors of information/knowledge? •Can everyone/anyone
be a complex thinker? Why/why not?
Activities/Assessments: In groups, create/design something which
illustrates complex thinking. You may (are encouraged to) use
examples from your course work. Combine ideas from two or more
of your classes which would illustrate the process of complex thinking
being used. Present your ideas visually, orally, in a prepared text
(which the class might use in a Socratic Seminar), etc.
Topic 5. Investigating Outcomes: Effective Communicator
Essential Questions: • What are the characteristics of an effective
communicator? •Consider the subjects you are taking in school:
How would someone in each of those disciplines achieve
effective communication?
Activities/Assessments: Class would play "Telephone," and de-brief.
Groups would create a symbolic language (numbers, hieroglyphs,
musical notation, periodic chart notation, etc.) and write a message
in that "language" for others to interpret. De-brief. • Communicate
an idea effectively in a medium you would not ordinarily use (music,
science, a foreign language, math, etc.). • If you couldn't speak or
write, how would you communicate ideas effectively? Do it. Create
a presentation (in any format) which would illustrate an example
of ineffective communication.
Topic 6. Investigating Outcomes: Innovation
Essential Questions: •What makes something an "innovation?" • What
innovations (historically) have changed the world? • What
innovations have changed your life? • Why aren't all innovations
successful or accepted?
Activities/Assessments: Identify innovations in the discipline areas you are
studying — that is, identify innovations in math, science, music, the
social sciences, phys. ed., art, foreign languages, literature, etc. {You
may want to interview some teachers for this}. Interview someone
in the "real world" who can tell you about an innovation in their
field of expertise and report back to the class about it. Bring in a text
for a Socratic Seminar which speaks to the concept of innovation (it
could be an innovative painting or piece of music). Explain in writing
why you chose what you did.
Topic 7. Investigating Outcomes: The Involved Citizen
Essential Questions: • What causes people to become "involved citizens?"
• Why do some citizens remain "uninvolved?" • What is the
importance or significance of being an "involved citizen?" •What
opportunities do you have — as a teen-ager, as a student — to become
an "involved citizen?" • Are certain people "exempted" from the
responsibility of being "involved" citizens (research scientists?
Theoretical mathematicians? University researchers?)?
Activities/Assessments: In a group, create an "Involved Citizen" manual:
what are the characteristics, activities, etc. that need to be included?
Compare group products and analyze similarities/differences. Find
or write a story which illustrates the benefits and/or problems which
arise when one is an "involved citizen." List activities or
opportunities you have to be an "involved citizen." Compare with
someone and discuss your ideas.
Topic 8. Investigating Outcomes: Self-directed Achievement
Essential Questions: • What are the characteristics of a "self-directed
achiever? • Are "self-directed achievers" always successful?
•What does "self-directed achievement" look like in the "real world?"
Activities/Assessments: Catalogue personal examples (not necessarily
school-related) of "self-directed achievement." Meet in
small groups and exchange stories of those experiences — compare
what motivated you, how you did what you did, how you felt about it. Are there common characteristics you can discern?
Topic 9. Investigating Outcomes: Collaborative Contributor
Essential Questions: • What are the characteristics of successful teams?
• What makes someone a successful team member? • What are
the best examples of collaborative work in the "real world" —
excluding sports and music examples? • When is collaboration
essential to accomplish a job, task, etc.?
Activities/Assessments: Working in groups, prepare a presentation which
will teach the class about something which the group believes is
important to know (and hasn't necessarily been taught in depth in
school). The presentation can be any kind of format but each group
member's contribution must be apparent.
Topic 10. The Senior Exhibition: Show What You Know - A first look
Essential Questions: • How do people clearly exhibit what they know — that
is, where do we see examples of people clearly exhibiting a variety of
skills and knowledge in the "everyday world?" • What should a high
school graduate know and be able to do (to "deserve" a diploma)?
• What should a college freshman know and be able to do (and is it
different than a graduating high school senior? If so, why? If not,why not?) • What is essential to know?
Activities/Assessments: Working individually, then in pairs or triads, first
brainstorm, then "compare notes" on the following task: Review your
high school career to date and devise a plan for "showing what you
know." What could you do to exhibit what you have learned so far?
{Keep in mind, you may have to look for ways to combine ideas from
several subject areas} As parameters: you would have a minimum of
one hour and a maximum of two hours to present your exhibition.
In the case being used as an example here, this would be the mid-point of the Advisory Program experience. Up to this point, the focus has been a broad one, looking at Exit Outcomes and the general operations of the school. From this point on, the Advisory would take on a more precise focus, with students looking more specifically at the nature of the content disciplines — where natural points of confluence and coherence may occur, in particular — and looking at how their school experience will culminate in a Graduation Exhibition. The overarching frame of the final topics/essential questions/activities & assessments, then, is designed to critically focus the students on the nature and purpose of the curriculum and to prepare them to create and plan their own Exhibition which reflects what they know and can do.
Topic 11. Examining the Curriculum
Essential questions: • Aside from content knowledge, what are the
significant differences between subject disciplines in school?
That is, what is the inherent nature of a "discipline" or "subject?"
• Where and how do we see disciplines "in use" in the "real
world?" • What do subject disciplines have in common? {Try
to be as specific as possible}
Activities/Assessments: "Expert Groups" Activity. Students choose a
discipline(s) to focus on and present their "answers" to the Essential
Questions to the class. Perspectives should include some historical
information (at least of the discipline within the history of the
American public school) and should use faculty members for
source interviews. Presentations may use video and audio tape,
if appropriate, and should include a written component with which
an Advisory Group/Class could create its own Curriculum Catalogue—
to exchange with other Advisory classes.
Topic 12. The Purpose & The Nature of the Disciplines: Math & Science
Essential Questions: • What are the ways people "translate" the world
through mathematics and science — and how are those ways helpful?
• In what ways do people use math in everyday life? Science? • What
are the less-than-obvious applications of mathematics and science in the "real world?"
Activities/Assessments: In pairs, students will "answer" the Essential
Questions by designing a "creative" presentation (problems, labs,
experiments, computer tasks/simulations) which will reveal what
they have discovered about math & science which they didn't know
before. The purpose will be to teach the rest of the class something
they might not already know. They should also devise a way to
assess whether the class has "learned" what they taught.
Topic 13: The Purpose & Nature of the Disciplines —
Language Arts/Social Studies/Foreign Languages
Essential Questions: • How does language limit and liberate people?
• What can be learned about a culture by simply studying its language?
• Are Social Sciences really "science?" • What is the significance of
studying "The History of . . . .?" {Insert: any language, culture, etc.}
Activities/Assessments: Divided into two groups. Each group will conduct
a debate {in a "fishbowl" setting} for the other group. Group members
will divide into "pro" and "con" positions for each of the issues raised
by the Essential Questions {e.g. "Language does liberate people vs.
Language does limit people;" "Little/much is learned about a culture
from studying its language;" etc.} Debates will be carefully timed and
the spectating group will critique the arguments.
Topic 14. The Purpose & Nature of the Disciplines: The Performance Fields
—Art/Physical Education/Music—
Essential Questions: • What constitutes excellent performance? • What is
the importance/significance of: knowing about art; knowing about
music; understanding physical fitness and health? • What is the
distinction between: •physical education and playing at "sports?"
•listening to music, appreciating music, and creating music?
•looking at art, appreciating art, and creating art?
Activities/Assessments: Students will write "answers" to the Essential
Questions in their journals as well as create a series of questions to
be used for interviews (which will be shared with the class) with not
only faculty members from the disciplines but also with "real-world" practitioners
in each of the areas studied.
Topic 15. Graduation Exhibition Proposal & Action Plan — First Steps
Essential Questions: • What would be the characteristics of an exemplary
Graduation Exhibition? • What are the characteristics of an excellent
plan for a major project in the world of business, construction,
communications, etc.? {For example: designing and building a
skyscraper or bridge; designing and presenting a presentation for a
business sale or a new t.v. series; composing and presenting a major
piece of music; developing and implementing a strategy for a
championship game in a sport; preparing and arguing a case before
the Supreme Court; conducting an experiment in a new field and
presenting its results publicly, etc.}
Activities/Assessments: Full group will brainstorm "answers" to the
Essential Questions together, then individually pare the list down.
In small "work teams" they will then research one of the examples
given (or a comparable one they design themselves), taking notes on
what goes into designing and executing/presenting a major project
or exhibition. The class will then compare the "work team" findings
with their initial ideas about what an "exemplary" project/exhibition
would be, so as to develop and clarify criteria and standards for the
Graduation Exhibition. ALL advisories would meet together in a large
group to compare their criteria and agree on some initial ideas about criteria and standards guidelines for the Graduation Exhibition.
{note: see "Criteria Development and Standards"below}
In the case we are using, students would now be starting their Senior year and the Advisory Program would become the vehicle through which each student would develop his/her Graduation Exhibition. The aim of the Advisory during this period would be to focus, clarify, and energize the students in their development of the Graduation Exhibition. The goal here would clearly be to put knowledge to use, in the form of the Exhibition, drawing on their entire Advisory experience (to this point) and using their content/discipline coursework as their foundation. The design here calls for, essentially, a supervised Independent Study semester during the spring term of Senior year, in which student work would be overseen and monitored by a Mentor teacher and a Peer Critique Team. The format for the Advisory during the Fall term would remain consistent with what has gone before — topic/essential questions/activities & assessments. The Spring term would follow certain "guidelines" (delineated below) which should provide students and their Mentors clear expectations, criteria, and standards for the Graduation Exhibition.
Please note: The Graduation Exhibition is NOT designed to show that a student is an expert or has "mastered" every discipline or content area. No single exhibition could possibly do that. Since the aim is for students to find a topic for their Exhibition which they genuinely want to research and publicly present in depth, a question might arise as to the student's abilities or competencies in areas NOT represented in his/her Exhibition. The answer would be to develop eligibility requirements before students could submit their Graduation Exhibition proposal. That is, each discipline/department would develop "certifying" or "qualifying" Standards which students would have to meet {to the department's satisfaction} before they would be eligible to submit their Graduation Exhibition proposal. These standards would be known to students from the time they enter high school and would be presented to them throughout their Advisory experience. This would not only make it clear to students what they would have to do and know in each department, it would create a clear, public statement by each department in the school as to what the standards and criteria of the institution were.
Topic 16. The Senior Exhibition: Research and Writing
Essential questions: • What is the significance of accurate and detailed
research? • Where do we see research being used in the "real world"
— and how is it used (to what end, for what purpose)? • What does
good research look like? •What does bad research look like? • What
are the components of excellent writing?
Activities/Assessments: Initial meeting will discuss the first essential
question: possibly using a short, researched piece of work in a Socratic
Seminar format. Next, students would find "real world" examples of
well-written research to bring to class, for exchange, analysis,
examination. Advisories would then be able to reach some collective
conclusions about exemplary research and how it can be well-written.
Topic 17. The Senior Exhibition: Preparing & Presenting a Proposal
Essential Questions: • What is worth knowing? What is worth knowing
in depth? • How does curiosity become focused to create "real"
research? • How can someone best "show what they know" about
an area or topic that interests them? • What are the components of
an excellent proposal? (Again, what are the "real world" examples of
this?)
Activities/Assessment: After discussing the initial essential questions,
students will work individually to develop a first draft of a Graduation
Exhibition proposal. They will then share this draft with a partner,
serving as "critical friends" for each other (see "Peer Critique Team"
Topic 20 below). Proposals will be submitted to Advisory and Mentor
teachers for review and the proposals will be returned for re-working,
with suggestions as to where to go and who to see to further focus and
develop the Exhibition.
Topic 18. The Senior Exhibition: The Presentation — Visual & Oral
Essential Questions: • What are the characteristics of an effective
visual component to an exhibition (any kind of exhibition)?
• What are the characteristics of effective oral communication
and presentation? • Where do people have to combine excellent
visual and oral presentation skills? What does it "look like" when
it is done well?
Activities/Assessments: After considering the essential questions, students
will work on a self-assessment of their own skills as visual/oral
presenters, developing a "what needs work" agenda. They will share
their agenda with a group of "critical friends" and devise strategies
for improvement.
Topic 19. The Senior Exhibition: The Mentor
Essential questions: • What are the characteristics and responsibilities of
an excellent mentor? • What are the benefits of working with a
mentor? What are the drawbacks? • How can working with a mentor
maximize one's performance?
Activities/Assessments: Students will work in small groups, exchanging
their draft proposals with each other and discussing/considering who
the best Mentor to work with might be, given the nature of the
proposal. While Faculty members would be the primary choices,
students could also consider administrators, teachers in the middle
and elementary schools, community members, etc.
Topic 20. The Senior Exhibition: The Peer Critique Team
Essential Questions: • What does it mean to be a "critical friend?"
• How does one give and receive criticism in a positive manner?
• Why is it important to separate "personalities" from "issues?"
• What is the purpose of a Peer Critique Team? What are its
strengths/weaknesses?
Activities/Assessments: This topic would be explored "workshop" style,
helping students "fine-tune" their skills as "critical friends" and
helping them choose who their Peer Critique Teammates will be.
While the concept of "critical friendship" should be used throughout
the Advisory program, right from the start, it is during the final
year of school that students should hone their skills. Can they
focus on what's important in a critique? Can they offer criticism
which isn't "picky?" Do they understand the subtleties of tone and
language which won't threaten a listener? Can they receive
criticism without becoming defensive, recognizing it is being
offered to improve one's work? Can they work well in a Team
designed for the purpose of Critical Friendship? In wrestling with
these ideas, in participating in exercises which promote these
concepts, skills, and abilities, students will create their Peer Critique
Teams and begin the serious work of their Graduation Exhibition.
8. The Graduation Exhibition: Processes and Logistics
At this point, students would be approaching the mid-point of their Senior year and would be expected to submit their Final Graduation Exhibition Proposal. This would be a detailed description of the area of study, the proposed Mentor, the Peer Critique Team membership, a research plan, and a detailed description of the presentation planned. The proposal could be presented to a Graduation Exhibition Committee (composed of students, teachers, parents & community members, as well as administrators). There could, in fact, be a number of these committees — thereby distributing the workload and the speed with which proposals were reviewed. What is most important here is that everyone involved in this process be aware of the criteria and standards required for the Graduation Exhibition.
• Criteria Development and Standards
Throughout the Advisory Program and in the planning, design, and execution of the Graduation Exhibition, students will have to be assessed. In order to evaluate student performance fairly, clear criteria and standards must exist. In keeping with a basic philosophy which rests on the concept of student responsibility and student/community input, any such criteria and standards must be generated through collaborative activity. The process of developing criteria and standards allows for the introduction of another significant concept — the idea of steadily improving student performance. That is, how well are we keeping track of the growth and progress of our students — and against what standards? This proposal promotes the idea that we keep careful documentation of student performance from the very beginning of their high school career, so that we can see: where did (s)he start? Where is (s)he now? Where do we expect him/her to go? With clear criteria and standards for the Graduation Exhibition, we know where we expect students to go. By building the other two questions into the assessment picture, we can see how students will be encouraged to reflect, self-assess, and self-correct. This is not, then, talking about a simple "A"-"B"-"C" grading system. This system would clearly inform students of their progress toward exemplary performance. In that process, students and teachers can determine how much growth students have achieved from where they started, and an important feedback loop between students and teachers is established. And that feedback, of course, would be based on the known criteria and standards, so students would not only know their strengths but would also receive valuable information about what still "needs work."
The process for developing criteria and establishing standards, for whatever needs to be assessed, is a simple one. Students, teachers, administrators, and community members must examine whatever aspect of student performance will be assessed — journals, group work, independent research, etc. — and start with some simple questions: "What does exemplary performance in this area look like? When those who are best at doing this perform this task, what does their work look like? What are the characteristics of those who do this task best?" These questions should generate actual samples of exemplary work as well as a list of indicators which, when examined and pared down, could become a workable criteria. Exemplary performances—often from the "real world"—could establish what Standards we want our students to aim for. Using the indicators identified, levels of work toward the standard — "expert," "apprentice," and "novice," for example — could be designated. The participation of all the stakeholders is crucial not only in making the system work, but in establishing its legitimacy in the community.
This process takes time, of course, especially in its initial stages. Nonetheless, it is necessary to go through the process of developing criteria and standards to clarify for students, teaches, administrators, and the community, the kinds of performance expectations the Advisory Program and Graduation Exhibition has for its participants. This is a dynamic and open process, subject to change over time, aimed at de-mystifying "grading" and moving it to a system of more authentic assessment of student progress toward known Standards which the community deems worthy of its graduates.
• The Exhibition
The vision for the second semester of Senior year is one of self-directed, independent learning, with careful monitoring and supervision from a Mentor, and with the support of a Peer Critique Team. Because of the breadth and depth of the Graduation Exhibition, consideration must be given to the kind of schedule students would be expected to fulfill during this time. This may initially appear to call for "impossible" changes for most schools and their 7/8/9 period-day schedules (whether with rotating cycles or not). However, if there is a genuine commitment to making students responsible for their own learning, and for preparing them for the world beyond the school, the second semester of Senior year seems the most appropriate time to "rehearse" students for the "real world." And it can be accomplished in some simple ways, without radically altering anything that already exists. My proposal is that the student be given tremendous latitude in designing his/her Senior year schedule. So, if the student were to take an Advanced Placement course (or two, which is not totally uncommon in some schools) (s)he could — being made aware of the possibility that this kind of schedule could prove overwhelming by the Spring. I also believe that any number of courses normally assigned to Seniors could be "waived" for second semester, not only giving students "school time" to work on their Exhibitions, but also freeing the teachers of those courses to work as Mentors, who would establish strict schedules for tutorial work with Seniors. Clearly, the focus here is on putting responsibility on the student to work steadily and assiduously throughout the second semester — just as they will have to when they begin college or work in the following Fall! Establishing strict deadlines for Exhibition "rehearsal" dates (late April/early May) and Final Written Research (mid/late May), clearly publicized to students. with regular reminders from Mentors and Peer Critique Teammates, would be a critical element in the process of preparing the Graduation Exhibition. And it must be made clear that the Graduation Exhibition is exactly that — a Graduation Exhibition. If students do not meet deadlines and perform to Standards, they do not graduate. This is the ultimate and logical final step in the proposed Advisory Program. Moving away from the accumulation of unit-credits for "seat-time" and granting a diploma for the result of four years of rigorous work publicly presented makes this proposal a clear departure from what exists today, certainly. The value of such a system, as presented here, speaks for itself. Students would have to examine their schooling, discover their strengths, work on their weaknesses, and, finally, present the fruits of their insight and labors in a public celebration of highly held standards and expectations.
• The Graduation Exhibition Format/Guidelines
The Graduation Exhibition, while unique for each student, would have some basic guidelines which all students would follow in fashioning their particular Exhibition. The following elements are proposed for inclusion in every Graduation Exhibition:
� The Student Journal — this would contain entries from all four
years in the Advisory Program, with a final, reflective piece
expressing how the student views his/her growth as a student,
and as a person, over that time.
� The Research Paper — each Exhibition should include a detailed,
written, research report; the substantive account of what the
Exhibition is about.
� The Oral Presentation — each student will be expected to present
his/her Exhibition publicly, before a panel or jury, for
evaluation. This would be like an oral "defense" which
students at higher levels of education go through.
� The Visual Component — most presentations would be expected to
include visuals — charts, maps, graphs, tables, artwork, photos,
videos, whatever — generally presented during or with their
oral component. There may be exceptions to this guideline,
of course, and a procedure or criteria regarding the visual
component may take that into consideration
� The Reflective/Process Journal — each Exhibition should be
accompanied by a student account of the process of
creating and developing the Graduation Exhibition. There
should be regular, periodic entries explaining the steps taken,
as well as what the student was thinking (and thinking about)
during the process. This journal could also reveal the variety
of resources —material and human — which the student
employed in the development of the Exhibition.
Needless to say, each of the components in the Guidelines would have appropriate criteria and standards which students would be aware of long in advance (probably from Freshman year on).
9. Implementation of a Change Process: Some Considerations
Introducing any new program—or any major revision of an existing program— requires serious consideration of a number of factors. Based on work found in Michael Fullan's The New Meaning of Educational Change and Peter Senge's The Fifth Discipline, I would like to examine some of the most significant factors related to change which this Advisory proposal might raise. First and foremost, as Fullan points out, a "simple implementation question" must be asked: "What types of things would have changed if an innovation or a reform were to become fully implemented?"[2] Teachers, administrators, students, and parents will have to look at this question long and hard when considering the Advisory Program/Graduation Exhibition proposal. Altering the basic concept of what it takes to graduate — moving away from Carnegie Units to Performance Standards — is a serious break from tradition and will require courage and commitment from all involved. Are the community, faculty, and student body ready for such a change? Fullan also notes that there are a number of "interactive factors" which affect implementation of innovations. These factors are "characteristics of change," "local characteristics," and "external factors."[3] Taken one at a time, we can analyze what we might anticipate in any effort to implement the proposed Advisory Program.
The characteristics of change, according to Fullan, are need, clarity, complexity, and quality/practicality. As he notes "teachers . . . frequently do not see the need for an advocated change."[4] It is important that the change be focused as specifically as possible and that there be some "early rewards and some tangible success"[5] once the program begins. I believe the design of this Advisory Program allows for that. Regarding clarity, Fullan points out that "lack of clarity — diffuse goals and unspecified means of implementation — represents a major problem at the implementation stage."[6] Again, this proposal is designed to not only identify the need for Graduation Exhibitions but, as importantly, presents a clear process (the Advisory Program) for introducing and implementing a Graduation Exhibitions system. The issue of complexity is "the difficulty and extent of change required of the individuals responsible for implementation."[7] Fullan notes that change has to be examined in relation to its difficulty; the amount of skill required to implement; the extent of alterations in peoples' beliefs which must occur; as well as shifts in teaching strategies and materials used. Complexity, indeed! In many schools, Advisory Programs have been problematic — largely because the curriculum has not been Content based in a specific discipline area. Understandably, people feel insecure when placed in an unfamiliar situation. There is, very often, critical questioning regarding the clarity of the program or its "specific" purpose or goals. The basic alteration in belief which the Advisory Program/Graduation Exhibition proposal presents is that students should have to demonstrate what they know and can do to receive a graduation diploma. This concept will generate "lively" (and heated) conversation between parents, students, teachers, community, and administrators and its resolution will make or break the proposed program. The shift in teaching strategies is one which will require communication and collaboration between Advisory teachers at a level uncommon in most schools. However, for this program to be successful, an entire faculty must endorse it and, as Fullan notes, "strong norms of individual classroom autonomy in some districts may actually inhibit organizational and district-wide changes."[8] These norms are common, but the Advisory program's design is aimed at changing those old habits through its inside-outapproach to investigating the nature and purpose of school. Finally, the quality and practicality of the program must "address salient needs, that fit well with the teachers' situation, that are focused, and that include concrete how-to-do-it possibilities."[9] Fullan is clear in pointing out that practicality doesn't necessarily mean "easy" but does mean that people can see where things are going. In that sense, this proposal attempts to provide the blueprint for a practical, high-quality Advisory Program/Graduation Exhibition program.
What might prove most critical in implementing the proposed Advisory/Graduation Exhibition Program is if the school attempting the change can transform itself into a "Learning Organization" a la Peter Senge's concepts in The Fifth Discipline. Senge's premise is that successful organizations in the 21st Century, whether schools or businesses, must become centers of "collective learning."[10] To do so, he recommends that these organizations be "decentralized, nonhierarchical . . . dedicated to the well-being and growth of employees as well as to success."[11] In the case of the school, the "employees" would include students, teachers, and administrators. Senge believes that basic modes of thinking about how an organization operates must change. His recommendation is to engage in "systems thinking" — wherein people look holistically at the organization before examining "parts" that might be malfunctioning. The point is that traditional "problem-solving" is short-term band-aiding of symptoms, neglecting the larger and deeper systemic causes of problems. Engaging in systems thinking requires new "mental models" which honestly question "deeply engrained assumptions, generalizations" which people hold, transforming them into a shared vision of what the organization can be. What this requires, in Senge's view, is "team learning"— people engaging in dialogue which questions their assumptions and generalizations and initiates "thinking together." The introduction of the proposed Advisory/Graduation Exhibition Program will set the stage for that dialogue, that questioning, and those steps toward systemic change from the inside! It is designed as a "team learning" situation in which teachers and students engage in collaborative inquiry and its simplest components are the new "mental models" which confront old methods and assumptions. In short, the Advisory/Graduation Exhibition Program proposed here is a workable vehicle for approaching the kind of change both Fullan and Senge discuss — with the benefit of not being a radical shift (at least initially) from the way things are. Because it begins from the inside, the Advisory/Exhibition concept can become the engine that drives greater changes in a school.
10. A Final Perspective
It is far too easy to give lip-service to new ideas, and too many teachers have seen too many "reforms" come and go in their careers. There is wide-scale skepticism and cynicism throughout the educational world, borne of years of misbegotten, short-sighted, and misguided attempts at change. It is imperative that a long, hard look at the necessity for carefully planned, developmental implementation of the proposed Advisory/Graduation Exhibition Program be considered by all the stakeholders it will effect. The realities of the world beyond the school, the realities which govern the 21st century, the realities of a failing "factory model" school system in a rapidly changing world, are the factors which must be addressed in any discussion of school change. This proposal is designed to start a conversation about how students can "show what they know" and, maybe as importantly, let the staff and community show what they know about teaching students how to show what they know and can do. This proposal is deliberately and consciously designed to encourage students to make interdisciplinary connections between their content courses through the Advisory Program. It will not be easy (because no change ever is) and it may not happen quickly, but it can happen and not only can it provide students, teachers, administrators, and the community with clear evidence of what students know and can do but it can also create a model for others to look to as "School" transforms during these final years of the 20th century.
References
Fullan, Michael, The New Meaning of Educational Change, Teachers College
Press, NY, 1992
Senge, Peter, The Fifth Discipline, Doubleday, NY 1992
Wiggins, Grant, Assessing Student Performance, Jossey-Bass, SF,CA, 1993
ENDNOTES
[1] This is not to say students would not be involved in producing meaningful work in those courses — it simply would be another approach to that end. The ideas of "consuming" and "producing" in the context of Bloom's taxonomy (knowledge/comprehension/application = consuming & evaluation, analysis, synthesis = producing) is taken from a scheme developed by Heidi Hayes Jacobs.
[2] Fullan, p. 66
[3] Fullan, p. 68
[4] Ibid., p. 69
[5] Ibid., p. 69
[6] Ibid. p. 70
[7] Ibid., p. 71
[8] Ibid. p. 75
[9] Ibid., p. 72
[10] Senge, p. 16
[11] Ibid., p. 15
