By Tom Many, EdD
“Unwrapping the standards will provide them [educators] with a first step to better focus instruction on the concepts and skills students need for success.” -Ainsworth, (2002), p.213
At its core, responding to Question 1 is about creating commitment on the part of the faculty that all students will master the most essential learning outcomes. In order to operationalize Question 1, teams must engage in a three-step process of prioritizing the standards to identify the most essential learning outcomes; unwrapping, unpacking or deconstructing the standards to pin point the highest leverage learning targets; and translating the learning targets into “I can” statements written in student friendly language.
The importance of prioritizing the standards has previously been established (January/February 2014, Vol. 71, No. 1). Whether they are called power standards, priority standards or promise standards, these statements represent what is absolutely essential all students know and be able to do. They represent a subset of the larger list of standards and help educators distinguish between those standards students “need to know” from others that are “nice to know.”
Doug Reeves and Larry Ainsworth, point out that standards are often written in complex ways using confusing language and nearly every standard contains multiple learning targets. They continue, “many [standards] are so dense and convoluted that they practically guarantee teachers will interpret them in different ways.” Their point is this; if teachers interpret standards differently and emphasize different aspects of the standards during instruction, it is virtually impossible to guarantee all students will have access to the same rigorous curriculum.
Interpreting the standards differently defeats the purpose of Question 1 which is to create clear, consistent, and coherent commitments among the faculty around what all students must know and be able to do. The only way to mitigate the potential for variance in the process is to unwrap the standards and identify the highest leverage learning targets contained within each standard.
“There is the added challenge of really understanding what the standard means. It’s one thing to read a standard and get a general sense of what it’s about. It’s another thing to thoroughly understand what it explicitly and implicitly indicates.” – Larry Ainsworth (2015)
The need for clarity or collective clarity, and precision it creates, necessitates everyone on the team share a common understanding of the meaning of each standard. When teams are clear on the meaning of the standard there is no ambiguity around what students must learn. Thus, the purpose of wrapping the priority standards is threefold: 1) to clearly identify what knowledge, skills and dispositions all children must know and be able to do, 2) to ensure teachers clearly understand the level of cognitive demand (rigor) and the learning tasks that are expressed explicitly or implicitly in the standard, and 3) to support identification of pre-requisite skills, academic vocabulary, instructional practices, and assessment strategies, as well as identification of any opportunities for intervention and enrichment.
“The goal is clarity—and by having that structured conversation that answers the question ‘What do they really mean by this standard?’ every teacher will be enlightened and informed on an equal basis.”- Bailey, Jakicic, and Spiller (2014, p. 60)
There are many variations of the unwrapping process but all follow a similar sequence of steps. One approach that is both effective and efficient was shared by Kim Bailey and Chris Jakicic (2012). It consists of a few simple steps.
First, focus on key words. Bailey and Jakicic suggest teams start by circling the verbs (what students should be able to do), underlining the nouns (what students should know), and bracketing or double underlining any context clues. Some teams prefer to substitute highlighters and use a different color for the verbs, nouns and context clues.
Next, map out the unwrapped standard. Transfer the highlighted verbs, nouns, and context clues to an unwrapping template which allows for a closer examination of the learning targets contained within the standard. The key is to study the standard and reach agreement on what the standard is really trying to say. Charting the unwrapped standard ensures all of the explicit and implicitly stated targets have been identified.
Finally, reach consensus on the targets. At this point, teams should intentionally slow the process down and carefully analyze the learning targets to 1) decide if any of the targets are more important than others (which targets must students master to be successful) and 2) determine what level of rigor (cognitive demand) is the best match for each target. These last conversations allow the teams to concentrate on teaching the highest leverage learning targets to mastery and help with planning the best approach to instruction and assessment.
The most effective way to become comfortable with the unwrapping process is to practice using it! Principals and teacher leaders should choose one approach (there are many available) and model the process during faculty meetings, rehearse it under the guidance of a coach, and apply it collectively as a team.
It is recommended teams unwrap only the essential standards. Whether called power, priority or promise standards, the team should focus its limited time and energy on the most important and impactful standards. If the team is able to unwrap all of the “need to know” standards, they can turn their attention to the “nice to know” standards at a later date.
“By unwrapping the standards as a team, each member walks back to his or her classroom with the same picture of what students should know and be able to do, and, consequently, the same expectations for student learning.”-Bailey and Jakicic, (2012, p. 38)
Teams should look at the unwrapping process as an opportunity to deepen their content knowledge and sharpen their pedagogy. A lot of learning happens during the unwrapping process so regardless of who (the state, district, or team) decides what is essential, teams should unwrap the standards. Invariably, teachers share that after unwrapping the standards, they feel that they know exactly what they want their students to learn, at what level of rigor, using which instructional strategy, and which assessment approach. Those insights into teaching and learning are priceless!
Dr. Tom Many is an author and consultant. His career in education spans more than 30 years.
References
Ainsworth, L. (2003). Unwrapping the Standards: A Simple Process to Make Standards Manageable. Denver, CO: Advanced Learning Press.
Ainsworth, L. (2015). Unwrapping the Standards: A Simple Way to Deconstruct Learning Outcomes. Education Week Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Jakicic, C. & Bailey, K. (2011). Common formative assessment: A toolkit for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Jakicic, C. & Bailey, K., Spiller, J. (2014). Collaborating for Success with the Common Core. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
TEPSA News, November/December 2020, Vol 77, No 6
Copyright © 2020 by the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association. No part of articles in TEPSA publications or on the website may be reproduced in any medium without the permission of the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association.
