Pedagogy and play creating a playful cur

Key Terms Play, Assessment, Learning, Growth, Mindset, Instructional Communication, Curriculum, Classroom, Pedagogy, Instructional Design Introduction Welcome to the playful classroom.

Chapter Four: Pedagogy & Play: Creating a Playful Curriculum for Academic Achievement and Engaged Learning

Brock R Dubbels, PhD

Dept Psychology, Neuroscience, & Behavior

McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

Dubbels@McMaster.ca

Key Summary Points

1 Using instructional techniques based upon play can improve achievement

2 A review of research on play is presented and provides a framework for designing based classroom instruction and assessment

play-3 Three case studies are presented as demonstrations of the framework

Key Terms

Play, Assessment, Learning, Growth, Mindset, Instructional Communication, Curriculum,

Classroom, Pedagogy, Instructional Design

Introduction

Welcome to the playful classroom This chapter will present ways to increase academic

engagement and achievement through play Three examples of classroom learning activities are presented as case studies to demonstrate ways for designing classroom curriculum through play

Play and games serve important roles in cognitive, social, and affective development (Dubbels, 2014; Fisher, 1992; Frost, 1998; Garvey, 1990), and should be part of classroom curriculum Play

is innate, and facilitates the individual’s need for competence and mastery for knowledge, skill, and social status (Bruner, Jolly, & Sylva, 1976; Dubbels, 2009; Piaget, 1976) For juveniles, learning mostly occurs through the observation, exploration, and discovery that happen in play (Lancy, 1996; Smith, 2004) Karl Groos observed that play was “critical” in shaping later

development in studies of both human (1901) and nonhuman play (1898) Robert Fagen (1981) identified play as an innate, and that an organism’s early play experiences are critical to

subsequent development and functioning

Rubin, Fein, and Vandenberg provided a thorough psychological overview of the role of play in their chapter in volume four of the Manual of Child Psychology (1983) They observed that humans play longer relative to other mammals that play Lancaster and Lancaster (1987) built upon this position and state that this extended period of play that humans experience is essential for development Bjorklund, (2006) expands upon this view, and states that humans play longer because they are adaptive organisms, meaning that they need time to learn, allowing them the skills and knowledge to become independent in complex environments Children in the United States live in complex, information-intensive environments It seems odd that play has been sacrificed when children are being raised in a time marked by increased exposure and valuation

of knowledge

Play is often attributed to childhood, but play happens with adults too (Geertz, 1972; Parker, 1984; Brian Sutton-Smith & Kelly-Byrne, 1984) Play is also commonly used for describing the mental state of video game activities, and often combined with a concept called “flow” (Bedwell, Pavlas, Heyne, Lazzara, & Salas, 2012; Cowley, Charles, Black, & Hickey, 2008; Nacke & Lindley, 2008; Pavlas, 2010; Webster, Trevino, & Ryan, 1994) Flow is very similar to play by definition According to Csikszentmihalyi, Flow is not an activity; it is a mood, or a mental state

Flow can happen during an activity, but it is not the activity (1992; 2014; Csikszentmihalyi &

Bennett, 1971)

This is very similar to what Brian Sutton-Smith stated about play He said “play might be most closely related to what happens in the mind when an adult is daydreaming—we lose track of time, place, and even perhaps reality of the moment as we are at play in our brain” (Meckley,

Dubbels, B R (2016) Pedagogy & Play: Creating a Playful Curriculum for Academic Achievement In: Learning, Education and Games Volume

One: Curricular and Design Considerations Etc Press

2008) Although the descriptions of play and flow are similar, Sutton‐Smith (2001) stated that play and flow are necessarily different concepts:

From a play theorist’s point of view, a criticism might be that in these terms play at its best, at its peak, would no longer be distinct from work

at its best, at its peak…more seems to be lost by such a universal notion than is gained (p 186)

For the purposes of this article, the concept “Flow” has great power and utility, but Flow happens

in both work and play Play is a fundamentally different approach to work activities, and this starts with choice and pretense (Garvey, 1990), but both can offer a feeling of timelessness

The experience of play offers emotional experiences, such as “feeling easy” during learning (Sackett, Meyvis, Nelson, Converse, & Sackett, 2010) When people are experiencing positive emotions or states, they feel like time is passing faster as compared to when they experience negative feelings This cognitive narrowing in play creates focus Prior descriptions such as Cue Utilization Theory predicted that high levels of arousal will lead to attention narrowing, which is defined as a decrease in the range of cues that an organism can take in and perceive from the stimulus and its environment (Easterbrook, 1959) This focus narrows our memory and attention processes, and shuts out thoughts and feelings that are not related to the experience of the activity (Elliot & Covington, 2001; Elliot, Gable, & Mapes, 2006; Gable & Poole, 2012; Sackett) Feelings and emotion exerts pressure on behavior and influences learning and perception (Greene, 2014) Along with filtering information, emotions can influence the recall of information (Schwarz, 1998) and the ability to learn new information (Winkielman, Schwarz, Fazendeiro, Reber, 2003) Additionally, if learning new information is experienced as easy, processing is experienced as pleasant (Winkielman & Cacioppo, 2001) and the result of this being greater likelihood to recall that information and to process related information (Winkielman et al., 2003)

Play is a natural form of learning for children, and requires exploration, discovery, and creation

In play, children engage in emulation (Whiten, McGuigan, Marshall-Pescini, & Hopper, 2009) Emulation is different from imitation and simulation (for a review read: Dubbels, 2014) Emulation happens when learners observe behaviors and strategies performed by others, but then

recombine elements of these behaviors into novel variations (Tennie, Call, & Tomasello, 2006; Whiten et al., 2009) In emulation, new insight and innovation are produced (Bateson, 2005; Bruner, 1972; Fagen, 1981; Sutton-Smith, 1966) Furthermore, learning through emulation comes with minimal costs and many benefits (Bateson, 2005; Burghardt, 2005; Spinka,

Newbury, and Bekoff, 2001)

Dubbels (2010) reported success with play activities for teaching science and engineering However, initial feedback from students was confusing When Dubbels asked, “tell me about what you learned”, many students reported that they hadn’t learned anything! However, these perspectives changed when the learners reflected back on the activity, and were asked to describe their process and relate their activities to the rubrics When students were invited to reflect, and the steps in the process were made explicit, they felt they had achieved a much greater awareness of their learning and the content, and were more likely to use the key learning activity concepts They also reported feeling more confidence, and that the activity helped them find words for their experiences Students also reported that activity was fun and easy, that answers came more easily, and that the classroom learning activity did not feel like school What was essential was helping the students match their learning through play with academic concepts and language This is done through designing play activities like one would design a video game Games are a structured form of play, and often involve emulation—emulation gives

a general goal, an initial starting place, and the student creates the process toward the goal This

is common in child’s play in primates (Tennie et al., 2006), where a child may see an adult doing something, but are not directly instructed through imitation (Whiten et al., 2009)

A game can acts as emulation by giving a range of tools, rules, roles, and goals that the learner can adapt to create their own learning-specific goals, towards the win-state described by the scoring mechanism in the game (Dubbels, 2008) Games also seek to engage the learner emotionally and cognitively, and sustain that engagement In emulation and games, the use of roles are important, as role play invites pretense, and allows the learner to act in ways that need not be associated with them directly They can take on their role, and role play The use of pretense and story can be used to protect the learner, so that they can take risks and try new ways being Piaget called this assimilation, where the learner tries on new masks and new roles, and then decides what they will internalize as identity This process removes risk, and provides some fun One student in the Rhythm & Flow activity said, “it’s not me, it’s my character”

(Dubbels, 2008), when recording their voice as an oral reading performance These roles are important in creating distance between the student’s real identity, and their play identity When questioned, the student can say, “I was just playing” This is done through using assessments that act as a roadmap to structure the emulation and play to provide:

• Options suggesting roles, rules, tools, goals, and ideas

• Criteria for choice, progress, and insight into quality of work

• Connections between experience and vocabulary to ground key concepts,

• Road signs, so that reflection happens along the way

• A common document, which serves as progress indicator, allowing the the instructor to facilitate learning by referring to the criteria, qualities, to discuss student choices about goals and process

According to Dubbels (Ibid, p 14):

Play activities such as emulations are well suited for this, as they assess, measure, and evaluate by their very nature

However, without clear criteria to guide the learning progress, and helping the learner to be reflective, most games will result in the Vegas Effect The Vegas Effect is where learning that happens

in games, stays in games There must be clear process for promoting learner reflection and criteria that serve as language for concepts learned in play These criteria work triple-time, informing the learner about their progress, giving language to important concepts, and metrics for measurement progress as criteria layered into the game play for assessment and learning feedback The assessment should work as a road map, informing the learner about quality of work and progress

Play activities such as emulation are powerful for learning The challenge is in taking the tacit dimensions of the experience and making them explicit (Polanyi, 1997) Tacit knowledge is kind

of like how we understand the facial expression of others, but we cannot tell which details led us

to understand Often we gather tacit knowledge in the experiences that happen during the course

of learning, but often we lose track of steps and decisions, or they are taken-for-granted This may occur because students are overly focused on the outcomes an activity, or because we have not designed the activities so that students stop and reflect along the away It is essential that we structure play-based learning that both promotes reflection, and connects the

experiences and learning process to key concepts and vocabulary Often learning how a process works is important, and there are often conceptual names for those processes and procedures Without guidance, these aspects of learning often remain just below the surface of our ability to explain It is the instructor’s job to use the assessments to help students negotiate their

oral language production than if they are interacting with an adult (Pellegrini, 1983) Additionally, when a learner experiences learning through play, where they can take on and role play adult work, they report the activities are more meaningful might and that it did not feel like learning, that it (the learning) was easy, perhaps contributing to the improved engagement and academic learning outcomes reported by Dubbels (2010)

According to McCombs & Miller (2007), the emphasis on testing and standardization was led by

a campaign of politicians and industrialists to influence what happened in the classroom With government reports such as Nation At Risk (1983), The National Governors Association (1989) worked to create Goals 2000 (1994) and called for greater levels of accountability for student achievement and rigorous academic standards, with more focus on standardized content,

standardized content delivery, and standardized tests This campaign to standardize schools worked to implement policy that contradicted and ignored 100 years of psychological research about human learning (McCombs & Miller, 2007) The standards and assessments provided guidelines that had to be met for federal and state funding, and this allowed corporate publishing companies the opportunity to sell schools pre-packaged, standardized curriculum and testing products, required by federal funding There a number of instances where the pressure to

perform was so intense, that entire school districts (superintendents, principals, and teachers) committed fraud by falsifying assessment data (Dayen, 2015)

One of the ways that schools were purported to be “failing” was through international testing, such as the PISA and TIMMS tests These reports offered comparisons between national

populations, such as American students compared to Finland A comparison such as this seems questionable, because often the comparisons to American students were made with national populations of smaller countries with social welfare systems This seems odd, especially with population differences In a country like the United States, there are a large number of children in poverty, 20-25%, it seems odd to compare an entire population of students to countries with smaller populations and a significantly lower child poverty rate: between 0-5% (Fisher, 2013) Socio-economic status (SES) has significant impact on student achievement (Sirin, 2005; White, 1982), and the United States did not fare well when analysis was not controlled for poverty This was because many of the comparison countries were often smaller, and did not have the same amount of poverty as American schools current school financing policies create a situation where students who come from family backgrounds of poverty and low SES are more likely to be

in school districts that are financially inferior, and at worst, in financial crisis

Schools are often an equalizer for poor students that come to schools without the social and economic benefits held by many middle-to-high SES students such as access to books, food, parental support with schoolwork, and financial stability (Sirin, 2005) Comparing these students

to students in social democracies highlights the disparity and impact of SES At present, one in five children in the United States lives in poverty (Gabe, 2015) What is truly disappointing is that the schools, which struggle the most, are often the first to get the standardized education, and that schools serving mostly lower-income students tend to be organized and operated differently than those serving more-affluent students, transcending other school-level differences such as public or private, large or small (McNeil & Valenzuela, 2000; Rumberger & Palardy, 2005) However, when SES is taken into account, and American students were compared to students of other nations by similar income, students in the United States did significantly better than all other countries when controlled for poverty

For every administration of PISA and TIMSS, when controlling for

poverty, U.S public school students are not only competitive, they

downright lead the world Even at home nationally, when controlling

for poverty, public school students compete with private school

students in Lutheran, Catholic, and Christian schools when analyzing

NAEP data (Ravitch, 2013)

These reports were able to change how school has been taught They were also successful in the expansion of the market for commercialized standardized curriculum, bring the word “rigor” to prominence, deprofessionalize teaching and inflate the importance of testing (Emery & Ohanian, 2004) The result of this has been a rise of standards and content over process, and the end for Learner Centered Practices in many schools An example of this comes from the dismantling of the Minnesota State Profiles of Learning The Profiles of Learning were controversial in

implementation; they were a set of performance-based standards grounded in a constructivist educational philosophy, an approach that differs from the content-based standards found in many states (Avery, Beach, & Coler, 2003), which emphasized project-based learning, and encouraged student choice in what and how they learned

Compared to Learner Centered Practices like the Minnesota Profiles of Learning, standards and content are easier to deliver, easier to test, and represent purchasable commodities The

Minnesota Profiles of Learning were rubric-based projects, where students constructed research projects in the form of an activity documented by portfolio and oral presentation This approach was intended to offer students nontraditional assessments ranging from constructed response items (short answer) to demonstrations of performance, such as conducting a science experiment

or giving a persuasive speech It also required talented, skilled teachers to design and implement

In contrast to the use of multiple-choice tests, the use of performance assessments is thought to challenge students in ways that allow for the construction of new knowledge based upon

planning, organization, synthesis, and construction This approach was built upon the ideas central to Learner Centered Practices, such as giving students more choice and ownership of their learning, and building upon individual strengths and diversity in thinking (Eisner, 1999; Wiggins, 1998)

If anything was learned from the standardization campaign, it was that the creation of standards and content has proven to be very lucrative, financially, to testing companies, and it has been destructive to school districts that work with children in poverty (Dayen, 2015) It has also led to a change of control of national education standards, and money, to companies that practice for-profit corporate philanthropy (Leistyna, 2007) The shift to standardized assessment and

curriculum has led to some instability, from state-based initiatives to the current effort on

Common Core—the standards and assessments seem to change every 4 years (Porter,

McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011) Each shift in standards constitutes a form of educational whack-a-mole, where districts are forced to purchase new curriculum, and states must create new assessments This is a lucrative market, over $2 billion annually(Strauss, 2015) To cultivate opportunity, educational publishers have been very involved in this process, Pearson Education, ETS (Educational Testing Service), Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and McGraw-Hill collectively spent more than $20 million lobbying in states and on Capitol Hill from 2009 to 2014 (ibid) In many ways, these initiatives have exacerbated the “problems” they set out to solve, and created a lucrative market for pre-packaged curriculum and tests, the deprofessionalization of teachers, and significant cost to American taxpayers

Interestingly, many parents and stakeholders have begun to see doubt the value of the tests, and have begun to “opt-out”, which is now called the “opt-out parents movement” (Layton, 2013) There seems to be renewed interest in the evidence-based approaches called “Learner Centered Practices”, advocated for by the American Psychological Association (APA) This may represent

a trend towards more play-based and learner centered practices

The standards approach has emphasized the identification and delivery of subject matter, and rigorous standardized tests However, according to Atkinson & Mayo, (2010) focus on subject matter and facts only serve to limit student motivation, learning and choice, and reduce the

potential for innovation This brings to question the purpose of school is it the role of schools

to make every child a repository of what has come before? Developmental psychologist Jean Piaget has argued against this idea:

The principle goal of education in the schools should be creating men and

women who are capable of doing new things, not simply repeating what other

generations have done; men and women who are creative, inventive and

discoverers, who can be critical and verify, and not accept, everything they

are offered ”(Piaget in: Jarvis & Tobier, 1988)

If the goal is to increase abilities for creative and innovative solutions to problems, then learner centered practices, and play-based approaches, such as emulation offer great promise To support such a classroom, one can draw from the APA-endorsed Learner Centered Practices (LCP) Learner centered practices enhance academic outcomes because learners have choice, similar to what was described previously in this chapter (Dubbels, 2008; 2010)

In LCP, students are empowered in how they learn, and what they learn through This is done through supportive relationships where they have ownership in how and what they learn—the same conditions that enable play Students engaged in play have ownership and control over the learning process, and learn more (Pellegrini, 1983)

LCPs is built from observations of play, and emphasize an understanding of the basic human needs for control, competence, and belonging (Deci & Ryan, 2004) Many of the elements

necessary to Learner Centered Practices in learning are also necessary to invoke play and learning through emulation Isenberg & Quisenberry (1988) and Christie and Johnsen (1983) present play as a set of cognitive, social, and psychomotor behaviors, congruent with Learner Centered Practices (Weimer, 2013) sharing fundamental characteristics LCP and Play both require:

• Choices in planning, content, and process

o The use of criteria referenced assessments such as rubrics and scales, which can offer choice in what students learn and how students learn They are still learning the same standards, but this method allows students to improvise and take learning in any number of directions

• Intrinsic motivation

o This is a result of having choice, the ability to be spontaneous, and explore directed assignments based upon standards in collaboration with a teacher This increases ownership and motivation, and the likelihood of creation and discovery

role-• Growth mindset vs fixed mindset

o The fixed mindset individual seeks opportunities to prove how smart they, and avoids situations where effort and new learning is required

§ Associated with play deprivation

o The growth mindset individual seeks opportunities for new learning, and is aware that effort is what creates learning

§ Associated with play experiences Play can be integrated into classroom learning Play is a mood that is created through the

fundamental characteristics of Learner Centered Practice In order to create learning through play, it is necessary to see play as mood, which is both a cognitive and emotional state (Dubbels, 2014; Sutton-Smith, 2001) A mood is not an emotion, but it is influenced by emotion For

example, play is not considered an emotion, but it is brought about through positive emotions

The playful classroom starts with emotional context Emotions are brief in duration and consist of

a coordinated set of responses, which may include verbal, physiological, behavioral, and neural mechanisms such as fear or happiness (Fox, 2008) Where fear prepares the body to respond to threats, happiness can signal an invitation to play and interact One can communicate a playful mood as an invitation to play, just as one can communicate threat, as a warning Each can lead

to learning and physiological response For example, extended exposure to fear response, or threat, can lead to neurocognitive degeneration called neurotoxicity, which causes measurable deterioration of the hippocampus, an area of the brain responsible for processing new memories and new learning (Gunnar & Quevedo, 2007; Lupien, McEwen, Gunnar, & Heim, 2009)

Alternatively, exposure to happiness, and play response can be restorative, and lead to

cognitive, physical, social, and emotional well-being (Ginsburg, 2007)

Like emotions, moods also exert pressure on behavior and influence decision-making (Forgas, Burnham, & Trimboli, 1988) To induce a mood researchers expose individuals to low-intensity feelings through exposure to images, words, and behavior related to the targeted mood These feelings are reported to come about gradually, and may last for an extended time as a mood (Bollnow, 1956; Morris, 1989), and can lead to trait changes (Lay, Waters, & Park, 1989)

When playful communication was used with oppositional children for forty-four days, these children exhibited trait change, showing a greater likelihood of accepting new tasks and

participating in on-task behavior and oppositional behavior was significantly reduced (Peed, Roberts, & Forehand, 1977) Similarly, Parpal & Maccoby (1985) showed that this technique also reduced opposition, and increased prosocial behavior in children with no diagnosis for opposition Responsive play, and other play interventions are intended to help change an individual’s

personality traits from being oppositional, fixed, and rigid, to being playful, open, and tolerant, similar to what Dweck (2006) has characterized as the difference between a fixed and a growth mindset A teacher can help change classroom and individual traits through both words and actions as instructional communication through:

• Choice and approach to content: activities, content, delivery system

• Teacher disposition: choice of language, types of interaction and feedback, and verbal demeanor

non-• Classroom climate: rules, decoration, structured interactions with classmates

• How assessments are used: high stakes driven) vs informing progress informed)

(data-According to (Reddy, Files-Hall, & Schaefer, 2005) helping people to develop playful traits, requires relationship enhancement with emphasis on unconditional positive regard

To be successful in creating a playful classroom, communication should encourage trust, safety and security, and non-judgment The adult should be responsive rather than reactive This

requires some detachment, and not taking oppositional behavior personally However,

detachment is not apathy; it is concern and caring without fear of judgment It is seeing the good

in the person and encouraging more of that behavior to come forward

When a child has had limited exposure and opportunities to play, they may not approach activities with a playful mood Their disposition may be similar to traits that Dweck, (2006) calls a fixed mindset, which may be a symptom of what Brown (1998) has called play deprivation Both fixed mindset and play deprivation present traits such as rigidity in outlook, oppositional behaviors, and fixed ideologies This does not mean the individual does not think they are smart, it predicts the individual will look for situations where they can prove they are smart, and avoid new challenges from growth, and when faced with a challenging assignment, problem, and/or situation, are more likely to give up (Dweck, 2007)

Conversely, individuals with a growth mindset are more likely to persevere in challenging

contexts, because they believe that with effort they will learn and grow to meet the challenge (Yeager & Dweck, 2012) Growth traits are created through play, because control is increased,

and threat is reduced It may be essential to provide opportunities to develop a growth mindset, and play may be an essential activity

The synthesis of the literature included in this review suggests a powerful common theme between Learner Centered Practices, growth mindset, and play The review provided a cognitive and emotional a framework for instructional communication, disposition, and content to create a playful productive classroom The following paragraphs provide framework for designing play-based assessments, built upon the cognitive-affective framework

To create playful classroom activities, Resnick & Silverman, (2005) suggest that classroom activities be designed so students are empowered with choice to pursue their interests while learning about important processes and powerful ideas To describe their approach, they use the analogy of a house with a low floor, high ceiling, and wide walls (p 119):

• The low floor is analogous to making the opening and introduction to activities interesting and easy, so novices can get started (low floor)

• The high ceiling represents potential for complexity and sophistication, so that as

competency and expertise grow, the learner can extend the activity (high ceiling)

• The wide walls emphasize activities that support and suggest a wide range of different explorations

The foundation of this house of learning is composed of what Papert called “powerful ideas” (1980) Powerful ideas are concepts such as the idea of “feedback” One can use this concept to understand many different types of phenomena in the world, not only in engineering, but also in biology and social sciences Powerful ideas are ideas with leverage They help to make sense of the world (Resnick & Silverman, 2005)

Assessment Considerations

When used as part of a student-centered approach to assessment, rubrics have the potential to empower students in the scope, depth, and qualities of their learning Assessment theorists, Black and Wiliam (1998), Shepard (2000), Brookhart (2003), and Wiggins (1998), describe assessment as a moment of learning that can engage students in decision-making, and help them to invest in activities where they can exercise choice This moment of learning is intended

to be an LCP, where agency and ownership are part of learning, and the assessment works as a roadmap, promoting academic self-regulation, goal setting, planning, self-judgment, and self-reaction (Zimmerman, 2000)

When rubrics and scales are used in an informative way, they can work as roadmaps, clarifying quality performance Black and Wiliam (1998), describe assessment as a cycle, where

assessment works as a tool to help students to create and synthesize goals from assessment criteria; consider evidence about quality of their work; and create process to integrate

assessment criteria and qualities with their learning goal When an assessment is used to create learning goals, students are provided a learning roadmap, where they can develop a vision of what success might look like, and help them to make dependable judgments about the quality of their own work

Three forms of assessment:

• Formative assessment: Formative assessment is used as a performance indicator It is

an example of an external tool added on to the learning activity to gauge progress It is often used as a pretest, or an external measure that happens during the lesson

• Summative assessment: Summative assessment provides a final evaluation or

summarization of learning A typical summative assessment is a standardized test

Summative assessments are often tools external to the learning activity, and serve as an end marker in learning

• Informative assessment: An informative assessment informs the learner during

instruction It acts as a road map, directing the learner towards instructional outcomes It acts as a marker for learning as way finding

All three of these assessments can be communicated and implemented in a playful manner However, to create a playful mood, the assessment must align with the goal orientation of the learner, otherwise the activity is motivated through external forces such as reward or punishment, which may not sustain engagement (Dubbels, 2009) All three assessments can be used in play and emulation; however, the essential difference is that an informative assessment occurs within the flow of learning There are five big ideas here:

1 The assessment becomes a roadmap by providing a starting point, scaffolding, and direction

a All assessment types can be used to measure learning growth and summary evaluation, but a playful approach will emphasize LCPs, and encourage play

2 Data-informed, rather than data-driven

a Using a playful approach in the classroom represents a fundamental change in assessment, offering a philosophy of playful and data-informed assessment, as compared to standardized, data-driven assessment

3 Learning never ends, and the lesson is never over Learning activities

a Are easy to start (low floor),

b Have a high ceiling and wide walls allowing greater range and complexity

c Are built upon a foundation of powerful ideas

4 Assessment should act as a means for communication between the instructor and learner This allows the instructor to:

a Encourage students

b Clarify learning criteria and qualities

c Brainstorm and help lower the floor

d Gather student understanding of the concepts, terminology, and process

5 The instructor is also a learner

a The instructor learns about student understanding of the activity

b Model the practice of a growth mindset and reflection

i Summarizing, question generating, clarifying, and predicting These five ideas provide support for the ways assessments can be used as roadmaps The big idea is that effective teachers do not make assumptions, or jump to conclusions about student learning (Danielson, 2009) It is important that teachers model a growth mindset and a learner centered practice It communicates a playful mood, growth mindset in a way that says: “I too am always learning Right now I am learning about how you understand this activity, and what I can

do to help you.”

An avid interest in students and their learning progress, and constantly gathering new information about the learning activities they design John Dewey, (1986) suggested that reflection begins with a “good” problem, such as:

• How do I know the activities I am presenting to learners are being understood?

A playful classroom emphasizes the instructor to be more of a facilitator This approach to instruction and assessment draws heavily upon role-play and emulation Educators can model how they process the instructions of the activity, and then have the students emulate them through a reciprocal teaching strategy: summarizing, question generating, clarifying, and

predicting (Palinscar & Brown, 1984) After the educator demonstrates this process, they ask the student to emulate the teacher, and teach the teacher about the lesson using the same four strategies

This practice can be silly or serious, depending upon the mood in communication Perhaps the teacher exaggerates their personality, and the student mimics that back This creation of mood in instruction draws upon signaling in play, and allows for playful learning

Signaling play allows for the individual to move from vigilance to play One does not have to act silly to signal play Play can be communicated as being inventive and playful, offering a mood to reduce threat, and help students interpret messages and intentions for an appropriate response

Mood communication can happen as verbal activities in content such as speech and text, as well

as non-verbal activities such as images, sounds, gestures, and design features in objects as content, as well as assessment

Case Study One: Boat Racing as a STEM Engineering Unit

Context: This activity took place in a 9th grade course on engineering at Washburn High School

in Minneapolis, MN This course had a very specific teacher-directed pedagogy There were hands on activities, but these activities were teacher directed, and lecture-based There was a clear scope and sequence, a textbook, prepackaged teacher PowerPoint’s, data-driven

assessments, and designed to be delivered as a lecture This was not a playful curriculum; it was

a scripted curriculum This did not bode well, because there was already discord in this

classroom: the teacher had been removed, and the author (of this chapter) took over midway through the first quarter In the beginning students were often oppositional and off-task To counter this, the (author) classroom instructor modified the prepackaged curriculum to be more play-like, with the intention of increasing on-task behavior, improved academic outcomes, and a reduction of academic disturbances through offering a hands-on activity through emulation

Purpose: The author designed this activity as a boat race The intent was to instruct students in

principles and process from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) The students were to play the role of a boat designer and learn concepts like naval architecture, marine engineering, mechanical drafting, the engineering notebook, measurement, engineering design principles, and scientific principles such as buoyancy, displacement, force, turbulence, and weight through learning the scientific process: reasoning, hypothesis testing, data collection and interpretation of the data

Description: An emulation is a style of learning that is similar, but different from a simulation (for

a review, see: Dubbels, 2013) Emulation is more playful than a simulation, as it requires greater improvisation To create this emulation students were given an initial general goal (build a boat),

a role (boat designer), and shown a range of resources and tools to be used in service of

designing and building the boat they were to race

The initial emphasis in the lesson was the boat race Students were told that they would be designing and building a boat There would be four different competitions:

1 Speed: first boat across the pool

2 Weight-Bearing: boat that could carry the most weight

3 Stability: boat that could handle rough water best

4 General Purpose: best average scores across competitions

By taking the role of a boat designer, students used available tools, resources, and information to improvise a sailboat In order to provide guidelines for assessment, a rubric was created for each station, which served as a roadmap (table 1, below)

Table 1 Station One Rubric Boat Building Emulation

For one of the first activities (table 1, above) students created an isometric sketch in their

engineering notebook This required demonstration of their knowledge of an isometric sketch, which is drawing of an object intended to combine the illusion of depth, as in a perspective rendering, with the undistorted presentation of the object’s principal dimensions—that is, those parallel to a chosen set of three mutually perpendicular coordinate axes By annotating the sketch, the dimensions, materials, and reasoning, the student could level up with review and assessment from the teacher A passing score allowed the student to move to the next station, or resulted in suggestions of making changes to their boat, and improve their score on the rubric, and grade in the grade book

Figure 1 Images of Boat Building Emulation Stations

A word wall informed annotation of the isometric sketch A word wall is a collection of words, which are displayed in large visible letters on a wall, bulletin board, or other display surface in a classroom In this lesson, the word wall contained key vocabulary for the activity such as:

buoyancy, displacement, force, turbulence, and weight

To move to each workstation (figure 1), such as making annotated isometric sketches of their boat, students had to synthesize key vocabulary and process, and check in with the teacher for a review and sign-off The sign-off worked as a running record, where students would use the language of the rubric and word wall and explain how they had met the criteria, and make a case for their score This negotiation led to improved comprehension of the concepts and terminology, and provided common understanding of quality (Dubbels, 2010) When students received a lower score than they wanted, they were encouraged to make changes that were aligned with the rubric quality criteria This process continued station-to-station, moving from the isometric sketch,

annotation and proposed construction of the boat Once students had their plan approved, they leveled up, putting on their safety glasses and began to craft their hull based upon the plan detailed in the annotated isometric drawing This included cutting and constructing the Styrofoam hull, creating the sails, and eventually participating in the competitions

Key Findings:

Results from the STEM boat building activity were very positive In a report presented at the National Science Foundation (Dubbels, 2010), data analysis showed a significant increase in engagement, a significant reduction in classroom behavior incidents (written referrals), and improved successful academic performance, including recall and comprehension Additionally, the students reported enjoying the class and specifically the activities They shared that they liked having more choice, and making the boats

Instructor reflection indicated the activity was more fun to teach The emphasis on playful mood made a difference in classroom climate Changing the activity from direct instruction to emulation required more planning, and required some practice maintaining the playful mood At times it was

a challenge to be responsive to students, rather than reactive In the beginning, students could be challenging and test the limits of the activity—and the teacher’s patience It was essential to remain detached and maintain a playful mood

It was important to look for and reinforce good behavior This was done through identifying students on task, and praising them on their effort, and progress using the assessments as roadmaps for successful behavior In the boat design activity, the assessment, classroom,

teacher, and classmates all became resources to help facilitate ideas, and each learner could apply what they observed and build their boat The assessments happened in the flow of the activity This process integrates the assessment into the flow of learning, in what is called an informative assessment (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Forster, 2009; Wiliam, 2007; Wiliam & Thompson, 2007)

This approach removed the threat of assessment and learning, and positioned the quality of work

as a negotiation, where the student developed the outcome and qualities through the process of trial and error, where the key processes and concepts were imbedded in service to building the boat This removed the threat of judgment and evaluation, by allowing mastery learning, so that the student built their knowledge and skill, while building their boat This activity depended heavily

on improvisation and a playful approach, where observation, trial and error, and learning from mistakes were a natural part of the learning (Dubbels, 2013)

A successful strategy called a “sunshine call” was immensely helpful in creating and maintaining

a playful learning mood A sunshine call is when the instructor calls home and praises the student effort in class The teacher does this in the flow of the classroom session If the student agrees, the teacher calls home and asks if they can share a proud moment about the child with the child’s caretaker The teacher describes the positive academic behavior, and shares that they are proud

of the student, and wanted to celebrate the student, and that the caretakers should be proud Although this might seem disruptive, and potentially embarrassing, it has been very effective in changing the classroom climate When the author first did this, the classroom became oddly silent, and the atmosphere changed Not only did students soften, they began to gravitate more towards the activity, and open to the teacher The parents were surprised and expressed

gratitude for the positive call After just one of these public calls, other students asked how they might get such a call, and the author was able to direct the student to the rubric and show the roadmap for success Sadly, part of the experience of making sunshine calls was that the author learned from parents and students that they had never received a positive call home This simple act had a significant impact on class moral

In addition to the celebration of positive behavior, if the adult can practice open-ended questions, take care in listening, and offer playful activities like role-playing, and then tap into LCPs,

attachment formation and trust are more likely to occur This kind of communication is in contrast

to authoritarian leadership, which is composed of warnings, criticism, and directives toward

children—which is antithetical to creating a playful mood Playful communication style should be manifest not only in verbal interaction, but also in curriculum materials and classroom

management (McCombs & Miller, 2007)

Students appreciated being data-informed in the their work and progress When rubrics and scales were used in an informative way, students were more likely to use assessments as

roadmaps, and this helped to clarify quality performance When the assessment was used as part of the learning cycle, students were able to:

1 Create and synthesize goals from assessment criteria

2 Consider evidence about quality of their work

3 Create process to integrate assessment criteria and qualities with their learning goal This created greater engagement and ownership in the activity, and students were able to look beyond performance targets and the formal processes promoted by the school district, and help the students co-create activities for further development

Additionally, students shared that they liked the emulation activity They liked taking on the role of

a marine engineer Many students reported that they did not know there was such a profession

In reflection, it would have been exciting to have had naval architects and marine engineers visit,

in the same way that Shaffer (2006) had engineers lead design groups Like Shaffer’s epistemic games (ibid), the emulation served to give students specific roles, providing

• The low floor: making the introduction to activities accessible, interesting and easy, so novices can get started (low floor)

• The high ceiling: allowing for students to create boats of complexity and sophistication,

so that as competency and expertise grew, the learners could extend the activity (high ceiling)

• The wide walls: gave students a variety of ways to make boats and invest in the project personally through choice and effort (wide walls)

• Powerful ideas: topics like buoyancy, resistance, and other key concepts helped students

to apply formal vocabulary to concepts of which they had previously had only an informal understanding (powerful ideas)

Administrators reviewing my revised curriculum and approach had experience with a range of instructional approaches and connected to what was trying to be accomplished By modifying the pre-packaged direct instruction and making the instructional communication playful, using

emulation (play) led to greater engagement, with fewer behavioral incidents (written referrals) and improved academic performance For a more thorough analysis of this activity and outcomes, see (Dubbels, 2010)

Case Study Two: Language Arts (Rhythm & Flow)

Context: The activity was designed by the author to support ESOL students and reluctant

readers, and first taught at Green-Central Elementary School in Minneapolis, MN in a multiyear classroom composed of fifth and sixth graders It was also used with young mothers at the Broadway High School, with the intent of training advanced college reading placement

Purpose: The Rhythm & Flow curriculum was created to improve reading fluency and

comprehension Students were taught that how something is expressed is just as important as what is expressed In this unit, students learned powerful ideas in reading fluency and

comprehension as: prosody, volume, pitch, emphasis, and composition

Description: The Rhythm & Flow activity is an emulation that trains students in reading fluency

and oral reading Emulation, as described in previous sections of this chapter, is a type of play game In Rhythm & Flow, the learner takes on the role of a media personality—they could be

role-an entertainer like Krole-anye West, Jennifer Lopez, or Katy Perry, whomever the student feels role-an

affinity for They use this media persona to interpret texts, asking questions like “how would Kanye sing this?”

Not only does the student perform, but they also create lyrics, borrowing and interpreting from texts such as poems, newspaper clippings, and found texts They learn that anything can be a lyric, and then they seek to perform and produce recordings, surrounding the vocal with sounds and instrumentation—they put a beat behind it

In order to provide some structure, an informative assessment was used A reading fluency scale was modified to be more playful and learner-centered to guide students in different qualities of oral reading and interpretation The values of using this assessment tool is that it provided the student and instructor with shared language so they could describe aspects of their performance and eventually relate elements of that performance into silent reading

Table 2 Modified Fluency Scale for Rhythm & Flow Emulation

This scale was modified to valorize the student effort The original reading fluency scale is composed with formal, objective language, typical of standardized assessments, and serves as a curriculum based measure (Deno & Marston, 2006) In Figure 6 (above) the formal language of the standardized measure has been translated to a more playful mood This simple modification changed usage from a formative assessment, to an informative assessment—from a formal data-driven collection tool, to a tool capable of informing student progress as a roadmap This tool was used to enhance instruction, allowing the teacher to act a s a facilitator, and allow the student to develop a vision of what success might look like, and help them to make more dependable judgments about the quality of their own work

The instructor can sit next to the student and talk about what each category in the scale sounds like This provides two benefits:

1 It provides guided practice for close reading of an assessment

2 It provides reciprocal teaching, so that the teacher can provide an example that the student can emulate