If kids start at different levels how can you make appropriate success criteria for all? How many different criteria can be done? How do you know what they can do in the time that you have?
That's sort of where ideas like UDL come in. You can still have success criteria of say "Be able to show/ describe the structure of DNA including phosphates, sugars, ..." but still leave it open as to how the student expresses that idea. I think that works?
How do you get a kindergarten student at poverty level to interpret feedback when the vocabulary level of these students is so low? I find these students have difficulty expressing into words their thoughts.
Pauline here. John, are you aware of how your ideas have been taken by misguided senior management, interpreted by them and implemented in schools in ways that would be unrecognisable to you, to the detriment of students and teachers?
Well here is a problem, lets say you are doing something like Newton's Laws of Motion or perhaps the Arhimedes Principle or DNA. Your students have a once in a life time opportunity to speculate what these are and how they work and then to put those speculations to the test. This thinking most of which is higher order thinking becomes impossible when "They know what success looks like".
That is a very good point, but couldn't the 'success' be how they record their learning - using academic language, considerations of fair testing, how they display data and so on? That way they would be able to hone their skills whilst not losing out on the exhilaration of discovery, which as you quite rightly point out is key to higher order thinking.
If you assume the definition of ''what succes looks like'' is the answer to what Newton's Laws of Motion are and how they work you've got a problem yes. But is this his definition of what succes looks like? I think if you find out a way to tell students what succes looks like without taking away challenges and goals you can inspire and motivate them in more effective ways.
@@melissahoare2053 Look it is possible to have success criteria without revealing the hook or the journey of discovery. But frankly I think they get in the way. I still use success criteria for nearly half my coding lessons, so for instance if there is a core skill I want everyone to learn I make that super explicit and revisit it at the end. But if the lesson is for the most part creative and open ended, I dont constrain students by telling them what I expect them to learn or what I expect that to look like. . . I only tell them that if they are stuck and struggling. The catch is that I mostly work with gifted and talented students so my experience is a bit different to most teachers
@@nigelvanderputten6337 Yep that is definitely possible. I have many colleagues that do it. Heck I chose to do it a lot of the time (I do them more now than I did when I made that comment) , but if my goal is to create a sense of mystery or a playful creative activity I find I am better off without them.
