Each Sunday I look in the paper to see how our various sports teams did in their competitions over the weekend. In August and September I inevitably find that several of our schools’ football games were lopsided affairs with one of our teams either winning or losing by a sizeable margin. On the assumption that to lose by 40 points is demoralizing, there is a part of me that wonders how a team maintains its spirit after suffering such a loss. But after watching the Skyview Homer game yesterday, this speculation was dismissed. Last week Homer lost by 72, this week Skyview lost by 30, yet the enthusiasm that the players showed until the final whistle belied what happened last week or what was happening yesterday.
There are plenty of studies that show that students who participate in sports do better in school than those students who do not. I know that some point to sports as being positive for the school culture and that a positive school culture will lead to a higher rate of student success. Although the outcome of yesterday’s game was determined early, both the crowd and the coaching staffs never stopped encouraging their teams. I was impressed by the players during the last minutes; both sides played as though the score was tied. As we teach our students to be successful in a dynamic world, it appears that the Skyview and Homer players were demonstrating the needed trait of resilience. I know that some feel that the resources that we dedicate to student activities could be better used elsewhere. And while there is always room for debate on this issue, it is clear to me that our sports program has a place in our system and that because of this, our students are better for it
Common Assessments
Last week I met with the building representatives of our education association. We had a good conversation that mostly focused on how the district is guiding instruction and measuring student learning. Despite not having all the answers to the posed questions, I was pleased that the teachers were grappling with how the district can better support their instruction. While some of the questions had relatively simple answers, the district developing its own assessments was the topic that garnered the most attention. I felt that the underlying concern was that these assessments would assume a greater significance than they deserved.
For the past two years the district has been creating common quarterly assessments as part of its curriculum development process. At first glance it appears that the inclusion of these assessments are just more testing. And while the tests are more formal, they should simply replace the individual or resource driven assessments that teachers have used for years. From a district perspective, the results of the tests will help us to identify holes in our curriculum or gaps in our resources and in turn, drive our professional development. The original intent of adding the tests was not to measure student learning, but we do recognize that we will need this sort of formal assessment of student growth to meet the teacher evaluation regulations. My sense is that the unspoken part of our conversation last week is that there is not a simple causality between instruction and student learning. All teachers understand that there are a plethora of variables that affect student learning and that a common assessment can only tell you so much about the instruction. Nevertheless, the information provided by these tests will help the districts and our teachers improve.