The Rookery

Today's New York Times had an essay  by Angela Duckworth about character education.  She, along with Carol Dweck, a major proponent of the "growth mindset," have been leading voices in the recent conversation about developing "grit," resilience and character in schools.

At Prairie Creek character education is nothing new.  The focus on social curriculum was a part of the founders' vision.  The "Habits of Mind" have helped us guide conversation and goals with students for the past fourteen years.  We have been excited to see the topic receive more attention in the media and in schools.  We know, deep down, that addressing only the academic needs of students leaves them ill prepared to be contributing, successful citizens as adults.

But, as Duckworth outlines in her essay, as character education has gained favor in schools, there has also been a push to measure outcomes.  It's hard enough to design a good measure of complex skills like reading comprehension or math problem solving…but how do you measure something like resilience?

The answer is observation, conversation and knowing a child.  By spending two years with a child, I am able to develop a deep understanding of how they currently approach challenges or how they handle failure.  When I sit down to help a a student set goals for herself, I can use specific observations of her work to help suggest Habits of Mind that are current opportunities for growth.  

The attempts at standardized measurements for "soft" skills like "grit" or engagement are lacking at best and often, sadly, laughable.  Many are well meaning but ask students to answer such questions as "I find good ways to deal with things that are hard in my life." or "I think it is important to help other people." (Both of these are from a tool called the "Developmental Assets Profile")  We've administered this survey as part of Northfield Promise and the results are just for information gathering.  But it is obvious to students what the "right" answer is.  

On an earlier iteration of the survey, students were asked if they had a "best friend" and one student raised her hand and shared she knew that the survey "thought that was a good thing" but that she thought it was better to have several close friends instead of relying on just one and did I think she should answer that she had a best friend because that would show that she knew friendship was important?

8% of our fifth graders (that's two students, by the way) replied "Not at all or Rarely" to the statement "I say no to tobacco, alcohol, and other drugs."  Hmmm…it's my guess that they don't say "Yes" to drugs and alcohol all the time but rather aren't offered them regularly and therefore say neither "Yes" nor "no."  Fifth graders are still pretty literal – and double negatives are tough for all of us to weed through.

The challenges confronting anyone who wants to use these tools to hold schools "accountable" are obvious.  In Minnesota we don't, as yet, have an MCA to "ensure" that our growth mindset curriculum is effective.  However, we are mandated to use "student engagement data" as a part of our teacher evaluations.  The argument is usually, "how can you improve what you don't measure?"

Of course, the argument is flawed.  You can measure or know things in a variety of ways.  A clumsy questionnaire is no substitute for a conversation.  As a teacher, I learn so much more from an interaction than from a percentile.  The very social skills these surveys purport to measure are the ones they are lacking.