In my previous school district, I was the only teacher teaching a physics course with set, district-wide learning outcomes. These same outcomes were also taught in physics classrooms at the other high school in our district. But at our school, I was one of the 2 physics teachers. The other teacher taught the AP-level physics courses. So, in many ways, I had opportunities to incorporate strategies I believed were best for learners and that I found worked best for them without being seen as out of alignment with anyone in our building. My amazing friend and one of my teaching philosophy goddesses, Katie Novak, stated the following misconception about alignment: All teachers must deliver instruction in the exact same way. True alignment, she says, is about shared goals, rigor, and outcomes. Thank you, Katie! Katie has taught me to truly believe that learner variability is the rule, not the exception. I encourage you to take 10 minutes to listen to Katie Novak explain it in the ...
When I first began teaching in my current school 13 years ago, we had something called power standards. There were specific power standards for each class. Teachers spent many professional development hours debating about them and refining the wording. These standards were eventually put onto posters to be placed on the wall. In many cases, the were just that: words that hung on a wall. It didn’t feel like anyone owned these standards. So, they had very little power at all. In John Spencer and A. J. Juliani’s new book Empower , they ask us to rethink standards. If I had been presented with the ideas in Empower 13 years ago, I probably would have argued that I need to abide by these power standards and there is little I could change. The authors reply to this is focus on the areas you have control over. They say, “Standards are the architect's blueprint, and you, the teacher, are still the builder and designer.” (pg. xxxviii) Specifically, they recommend fi...