Rigor Paper

Rigor Essay

Dayna Perkins

Clear links between rigor-based assignments and learning performance have been established. Dougherty, E. (2012) stated “...Nevertheless, a link between assignments and effective teaching seems apparent if for no other reason than the fact that an assignment involves what effective teachers do—engaging students in complex thinking and skills using appropriate and focused instruction.”  In my current teaching position as a Technology Specialist and Computer Aide, I experience many opportunities to incorporate technology and computers into rigorous assignments that meet common-core standards. As rigor applies to my current experience, I will discuss three important perspectives that integrate technology into assignments and associated outcomes. These perspectives are: 1) rigor using multi-step processes, 2) rigor using differentiation through technology, and 3) technology itself can be one mechanism for characterizing the level of rigor needed to complete assignments. Leveraging technology and student enthusiasm can create an effective recipe for engaging students to think about complexity through focused instruction to align with common core standards.

Rigor through development of assignments that promote critical evaluation and thinking is different from assessments, which are documentation after instruction. Rigorous assignments “...evidence how well teachers make instructional decisions and choices in the teaching moment. Because teachers have control over the inputs in an assignment and the process of teaching them, they can manage instruction and pacing to ensure better outcomes.” (Dougherty, E. 2012). Often, technology offers opportunity to develop assignments that multi-step, allowing the teacher to have control over the process of managing instruction and pacing. For example, Google Earth was used as a technology compatible with instruction and assignment building for the common core standard in Geographic Representations SS.G.1.1.  The goal of the common core standard was to Construct and interpret maps and other representations to navigate a familiar place (Technology in the Illinois Learning Standards - English Language Arts, Fine Arts, Mathematics, Science, Physical Development/Health and Social Science).  This assignment was a multi-step process that involved loading a spatial file (*.KMZ or *.KML) into Google Earth from a Google Drive location, then performing an analysis of the associated data - in this case topographic maps. For this assignment, the engagement level was high, as Google Earth is a compelling platform that is accessible to even 3rd graders. Students were also excited to see that they could add any spatial data to Google Earth. Because it was a multi-step process to load the appropriate files and then view the corresponding data, I was able to pace the instructional process and interject critical thinking components.  The assignment was more than just loading the appropriate topographic spatial files into Google Earth. Students then had to complete the assignment of demonstrating understanding of interpreting the map itself. It helped to have the map ‘layer’ superimposed on Google Earth’s base, satellite map so that students could see where they were on the earth. Providing that spatial context for students to see topographic lines and their relationship to satellite imagery and familiar locations, e.g. the flat fields of central Illinois compared to the sharp slopes of The Grand Canyon, allowed critical thinking questions to be asked and answered.

This example also demonstrates that multi-step processes that are typically standard for technology can not only help the teacher create a pace for instruction but also can be leveraged for differentiation.  Technology helps differentiate what a student accesses from the instruction and creates a framework for support or advancement. For example, a student that struggles to load the file may need support to better understand the multi-step nature of that process. On the other hand, this same student may not need support interpreting the meaning of a topographic map and synthesizing the information provided by a topographic map relative to geographic location and land surface features. Another student may not need support loading the files into Google earth, but may need support interpreting the map itself. This support is not necessarily related to a multi-step process, but related more to the basic understanding of what a topographic map is and how to read it. Students who understand both the loading process and map interpretation relatively more quickly may be asked to perform more critical computations, based on the map content, like estimating how tall a mountain is, based on topographic lines on the map. Or they may be asked to find new files to load into Google Earth. Additionally, I may ask these students to present or teach their findings to me and the class at a future date to create peer-to-peer learning opportunities.  Beyond Google earth, another example of differentiation in creating assignments that integrate technology was in a fifth grade classroom when learning 3D printing. The class, as a whole, was creating the design for an elbow brace (device to help support someone with a physical limitation due to restricted arm locomotion). In the instruction, I asked them critical thinking questions about the application of the design as we would need to further manipulate the elbow brace after 3D printing with a heat gun. Thus, the elbow brace couldn’t be too thick or too solid or it wouldn’t be able to be molded to the person’s arm shape later, but it had to be strong. After some brainstorming, I instructed them on a lattice and honeycomb design and their structural properties. After the instruction, I asked the class to design these shapes in the 3D software without demonstrating it (students knew the basics of the software already). After two 45-minute class periods, they were successful and their engagement level was high. Some students were more capable with the software than others and the situation allowed for differentiation and associated support.

The final perspective discussed in this paper is that technology itself can be one mechanism for characterizing the level of rigor needed to complete assignments. Expecting students to not only understand topographic maps, but also use technology to demonstrate synthesis of the content is a high expectation for K-5 students.  By integrating technology as a metric to increase rigor toward common core standards sets high expectations. Past research has suggested that one important principle of effective instruction is to set high expectations (Education Trust, 2005). Specifically, effective teaching sets high expectations. When students are challenged by assignments, irrespective of their aptitude or prior academic performance, the learning environment is more engaging and student performance increases. Critical thinking and deep learning can be enhanced by technology, as technology can increase the rigor/expectation of an assignment.  In this way, use of technology, if used appropriately in alignment with common core standards, can be thought of as increasing expectations and rigor. The purpose of learning is to prepare a student to solve real-world problems and apply innovation and knowledge to explore new solutions. In today’s professional environment, technology has been completely integrated into almost all careers. Students must become expected to perform using technology as a rigorous component of their learning and preparation for these careers. While technology is itself not a common core standard, it is seamlessly integrated with every standard in some way.  

As a Teacher’s Aide and Computer Specialist, I see the value of technology first-hand. I have experienced how technology can be integrated with common core standards and increase expectations/rigor through multi-step processes, differentiation through technology, and using technology to characterize rigor. The level of engagement and enthusiasm is usually peaked using a form of technology and it’s at this time that rigor can be infused with standards, assignments, and learning outcomes. By aligning technology with common core standards, enthusiasm is created and expectations can be increased to engage students in critical thinking and problem solving in ways that can be developed for future application in higher education and eventually a career.

REFERENCES

Dougherty, E. (2012). Assignments matter: Making the connections that help students meet standards. Moorabbin, Vic.: Hawker Brownlow Education.

Trust, E. (n.d.). Gaining Traction, Gaining Ground: How Some High Schools Accelerate Learning for Struggling Students. Retrieved from https://edtrust.org/resource/gaining-traction-gaining-ground-how-some-high-schools-accelerate-learning-for-struggling-students/

TECHNOLOGY IN THE ILLINOIS LEARNING STANDARDS - ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS, FINE ARTS, MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT/HEALTH AND SOCIAL SCIENCE (https://ilclassroomtech.weebly.com/uploads/4/0/7/1/40712613/standardsbook-technologymasterk-5f.pdf)