Rigorous Learning Toolkit PDF

Rigorous
Learning Toolkit
Creating a Culture of High Expectations
For Teachers and Leaders

Excepting those parts intended for classroom use, no part of this publication may be reproduced in
whole or in part, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher. For
information regarding permission, write to International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.,
1587 Route 146, Rexford, NY 12148. International Center for Leadership in Education Inc. grants
those who have purchased Rigorous Learning Toolkit permission to reproduce from this book those
pages intended for use in their schools. Notice of copyright must appear on all copies of copyrighted
materials.
Portions adapted from: Using Rigor and Relevance to Create Effective Instruction copyright © 2012;
Effective Instructional Strategies, Volume 2 © 2012, A Systemwide Approach to Rigor, Relevance, and
Relationships copyright © 2012 by International Center for Leadership in Education Inc., published by
International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.
Copyright © 2015 by International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.
All rights reserved.
Published by International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.
Printed in the U.S.A.
ISBN-13: 978-0-545-91246-4
ISBN-10: 0-545-91246-6
INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATION, RIGOR/RELEVANCE FRAMEWORK,

and associated logos are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of International Center for
Leadership in Education. Other company names, brand names, and product names are the property
and/or trademarks of their respective owners.
8-01-2015
RIGOROUS LEARNING TOOLKIT
Table of Contents
A Systemwide Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Transforming Teaching and Leading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Understanding the Rigor/Relevance Framework® . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Cross-Reference of Knowledge Taxonomies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Defining Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Verb List by Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Copyright © 2015 by International Center for Leadership in Education. All rights reserved.
Instructional Strategies and the Rigor/Relevance Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Engagement Routines by Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Application Model Decision Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Student Work Products by Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Teacher Question Stems by Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Technology Use by Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Rigorous Learning Toolkit 3

A Systemwide Approach
The Daggett System for Effective Instruction (DSEI) is student-focused and considers
what the entire educational system should do to support instructional effectiveness to
increase rigorous learning for ALL students.
The Daggett System for Effective Instruction
Elements of Organizational Leadership
Create a culture of high academic expectations and positive relationships
Establish a shared vision and communicate to all constituent groups
Align organizational structures and systems to the vision
Build leadership capacity through an empowerment model
Align teacher/leader selection, support, and evaluation
Support decision making with relevant data systems
Elements of Instructional Leadership

Use research and establish the urgent need for change to promote higher
academic expectations and positive relationships
Develop, implement, and monitor standards-aligned curriculum and
assessments
Integrate literacy, math, and technology across all disciplines
Facilitate data-driven decision making to inform instruction
Provide opportunities for professional learning, collaboration, and growth
focused on high-quality instruction and increased student learning
Engage family and community in the learning process
4 Rigorous Learning Toolkit
Elements of Teaching
Build effective instruction based on rigorous and relevant expectations
Possess and continue to develop content area knowledge and make it
relevant to the learner
Create and implement an effective learner environment that is engaging and
aligned to learner needs
Plan and provide learning experiences using effective research-based strategies
that are embedded with best practices, including the use of technology
Use assessment and data to guide and scaffold instruction
Further content and instructional knowledge through continuous professional
learning that is both enriching and collaborative
When all parts of the system are working together efficiently, teachers receive the
support they need, and students are successfully prepared for college, careers,
and citizenship.
Comparing Models
Traditional frameworks are more teacher focused than the Daggett System for
Effective Instruction. Use the chart below to notice other differences.
Traditional Teaching Frameworks Daggett System for Effective Instruction
What teachers should do What the entire system should do
Teacher-focused Student-focused
Teachers deliver instruction Teachers facilitate learning
Define vision primarily in terms of Define vision in terms of strong academics and
academic measures personal skills and the ability to apply them
Rigid structures support adult needs Flexible structures support student needs
Focus on teaching Focus on learning
For more information, see The Daggett System for Effective Instruction: Alignment for Student
Achievement.

Transforming Teaching and Leading

The following charts describe the transformative shifts in how Organizational
Leadership, Instructional Leadership, and Teaching are approached in comparison to
traditional methods.
Organizational Leadership
From a Traditional Approach To a Transformed Approach
Vision set by top leadership Vision set by all

Priorities based on short-term results Priorities based on long-term improvement
Rigid structures to accommodate adult needs Flexible structures to support learner needs
Top-down management for ease of Top-down support for bottom-up
administration change
Teachers are the objects of change Teachers are the agents of change
Instructional Leadership
Principal leads Team leads

Manage the current system Change the system
Use experience to solve problems Learn new ways to adapt
Replicate practices with fidelity Choose practices to meet needs
Look to supervisors for answers Empower staff to take action
Rely on individual expertise Share each other’s expertise
Authority Collaboration
Teaching
“Deliver” instruction “Facilitate” learning

Teacher-centered Student-centered
Classroom learning Learning anytime/anywhere
Standardized approach Personalized, differentiated
Learn to do Do to learn
Content-focused Application-focused
Looking for the right answer Develop thinking
Teaching segmented curriculum Integrating curriculum
Passive learning opportunities Active learning opportunities

Understanding the Rigor/Relevance

Framework®
The Rigor/Relevance Framework is a tool developed by the International Center for
Leadership in Education to examine curriculum, instruction, and assessment, and is
based on two dimensions: the Knowledge Taxonomy and the Application Model.
The Knowledge Taxonomy

First, a continuum of knowledge describes the increasingly complex ways in
which we think. This Knowledge Taxonomy is based on the revised Bloom’s
Taxonomy:
6. Creating
Assimilation of Knowledge
5. Evaluating
4. Analyzing
3. Applying
2. Understanding
Acquisition of Knowledge
1. Remembering
The Application Model

The second continuum, created by Dr. Bill Daggett, Founder and Chairman of the
International Center for Leadership in Education, is known as the Application Model,
which describes putting knowledge to use. The five levels of this continuum are:
1. Knowledge in one discipline
2. Apply in discipline
3. Apply across disciplines Acquisition Application

of of
4. Apply to real-world
Knowledge Knowledge
predictable situations
5. Apply to real-world
unpredictable situations

The Rigor/Relevance Framework

The Rigor/Relevance Framework has four quadrants. Each of these four quadrants
can be labeled with a term that characterizes learning or student performance.
Characteristics of Student Performance
The following chart describes characteristics of student performance for each of the
four quadrants of the Rigor/Relevance Framework.
For more information, see Using Rigor and Relevance to Create Effective Instruction.

Cross-Reference of Knowledge
Taxonomies
Initially proposed in 1956, Bloom’s Taxonomy was the first to define levels of cognition.
In more recent years, modifications have been made to this original knowledge
taxonomy, and new taxonomies based on the original Bloom’s have been developed.
Multiple Knowledge Taxonomies

With several knowledge taxonomies now in use, a natural question is how these
new taxonomies align with the original Bloom’s Taxonomy. In the 1990s, Bloom’s
Taxonomy was updated and revised by a group of cognitive psychologists led by

Lorin Anderson, a former student of Benjamin Bloom, to reflect the movement toward
standards-based curricula and assessment.
Another version of a knowledge taxonomy is Norman L. Webb’s Depth of Knowledge,

developed in 1997.
In 2007, Robert Marzano proposed his New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.
The chart below shows the alignment of these four taxonomies. Note the levels of low
rigor and high rigor.
Cross-Reference of Knowledge Taxonomies
Marzano’s New
Bloom’s Revised Bloom’s Webb’s Depth of Taxonomy of
Taxonomy Taxonomy Knowledge Educational
Objectives
Knowledge Remembering Knowledge Retrieval

Low Rigor
Recall
Comprehension Understanding Comprehension
Basic Application of
Application Applying
Skill/Concept
Analysis Analyzing Analysis

Strategic Thinking
High Rigor
Synthesis
Knowledge
Evaluation Evaluating
Utilization
Extended Thinking
Creating

Defining Relationships
A clear taxonomy for relationships can help us understand the classifications of
personal relationships in dynamic, real-world conditions and help us maximize the
positive impact of these important connections as they relate to learning.
The Relationship Taxonomy
Levels Student-Teacher Relationship
0 Isolated Students feel significant isolation from teachers, peers, or even parents.
Students lack any emotional or social connection to peers and teachers.
1 Known Students are known by others and frequently are called by name. Teachers
know students and their families, interests, aspirations, and challenges.
Students are known by peers with whom they interact at school.
2 Receptive Students have contact with peers, parents, and teachers in multiple settings.
Teachers exhibit positive behaviors of “being there” that show genuine interest
and concern.
3 Reactive Teachers, parents, and peers provide help to students when requested, but
support may be sporadic and inconsistent among support groups.
4 Proactive Others take an active interest in students’ success. Teachers take initiative
to show interest and provide support. Students and others express verbal
commitment for ongoing support and validate this commitment with their
actions.
5 Sustained There is extensive, ongoing, pervasive, and balanced support from teachers,
parents, and peers that is consistent and sustained over time.
6 Mutually Positive relationships are everywhere and commonplace among the ways that
Beneficial students, teachers, and parents interact with and support students as learners.

Verb List by Quadrant

Use the Verb List by Quadrant to define the level of rigor. You can use this list to either
create a desired level of expected student performance or to evaluate the level of
existing curriculum, instruction, or assessment.
Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D

Calculate Adjust Analyze Adapt
Choose Apply Categorize Argue
Count Build Cite Compose
Define Collect Classify Conclude
Describe Construct Compare Create

Find Demonstrate Conclude Design
Identify Display Contrast Develop
Label Dramatize Debate Discover
List Draw Defend Explore
Locate Fix Diagram Formulate
Match Follow Differentiate Invent
Memorize Illustrate Discriminate Modify
Name Interpret Evaluate Plan
Point to Interview Examine Predict
Recall Look up Explain Prioritize
Recite Maintain Express Propose
Record Make Generate Rate
Say Measure Infer Recommend
Select Model Judge Revise
Spell Operate Justify Teach
View Play Prove
Practice Research
Produce Study
Relate Summarize
Role-play
Sequence
Show
Solve

Instructional Strategies and the

Rigor/Relevance Framework
The strategies below are rated for their appropriateness to each quadrant.

Strategy
Acquisition Application Assimilation Adaptation
Analogies
Analyzing Video Stimulus
Brainstorming
Compare and Contrast
Cooperative Learning
Crafting an Argument
Demonstration
Feedback and Reflection
Guided Practice
Inquiry
Learning Centers
Lecture
Manipulatives and Models
Memorization
Note Taking/Graphic
Physical Movement
Pinwheel Discussion
Problem-Based Learning
Semantic Feature Analysis
Simulation/Role Playing
Socratic Seminar
Storytelling
Summarizing
Teaching Others
Using Writing Frames
Key Less than ideal Suitable Ideal

Engagement Routines by Quadrant

Some examples of structured engagement routines are rated for their appropriateness
to each quadrant below.

Routine
Acquisition Application Assimilation Adaptation
Answers Up
Choral Responses
Give One — Get One
Idea Wave
Inquiry
Jigsaw Groups
Numbered Heads
Partner and Group Interactions
Pick and Point
Purposeful Viewing
Question Chains
Setting Up and Monitoring Tasks
Socratic Seminar
Think (Write)-Pair-Share
Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down
Turn and Talk
Using Response Frames
Write and Reveal
Key Less than ideal Suitable Ideal

Application Model Decision Tree

Select a task, application, or activity. To determine its level of relevance, use the
Application Model Decision Tree as a reflection tool by answering the following
questions.
Level 1
Is it application? NO Knowledge in
one discipline
YES
Is more Level 2
Is the application than one Application in
real world? NO discipline NO
one discipline
involved?
YES Level 3
YES Interdisciplinary
application
Level 4
Is the outcome Real-world
unpredictable? NO predictable
application
Level 5
Real-world
YES unpredictable
application

Student Work Products by Quadrant

Reflecting on the student work through the products created as a result of the activity
is one way to identify and raise the current levels of rigor and relevance.
Demonstrating Learning
Consider the context and work that students are engaged in when determining the
level of rigor and relevance. The following is a list of student work products linked to
each quadrant of the Rigor/Relevance Framework. Your students can use these work
products to demonstrate learning in each quadrant.
Some student work products can be used in multiple quadrants.

Products are listed where they are most frequently used.
Quadrant C Quadrant D
Abstract Exhibit Adaptation Model
Annotation Inventory Blueprint Newspaper
Blog Investigation Book Play
Chart Journal Brochure Poem
Classification Outline Debate Song
Debate Plan Device Trial
Essay Report Editorial Video
Evaluation Estimation Website
Game Wiki
Invention
Lesson
Quadrant A Quadrant B
Answer Reproduction Collage Performance
Definition Selection Collection Service
Explanation True/False Data Skit
List Worksheet Demonstration Solution
Quiz Interpretation Survey
Recitation Notes Theatre Set
Painting

Teacher Question Stems by Quadrant

In your learning environment, try using the following question stems that align to each
quadrant. This can help move students toward increased rigor and relevance.
C D
Ask questions to summarize, analyze, Ask questions to predict, design,
organize, or evaluate: or create:
to
as
that
you deal with
for
Ask questions to recall facts, make Ask questions to apply or relate:

observations, or demonstrate
understanding:
A B
Technology Use by Quadrant

Empower students to consider the following examples of technology use by quadrant.
Quadrant C Quadrant D
Engineering Mixing/
Remixing
Clipping/ Cracking Comments
Cropping
Blogging
Resources
Storytelling
Quadrant A Quadrant B
Lists Searching Searching Commenting
and Naming
Folders Bookmarking
Running a RSS Feed

Selecting Program
Social Media

18
NOTES
Rigorous Learning Toolkit

19
NOTES
20
NOTES


Rigorous Learning Toolkit PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Rigorous Learning Toolkit PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Rigorous

For Teachers and Leaders

Copyright © 2015 by International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.

All rights reserved.

Published by International Center for Leadership in Education Inc.

Printed in the U.S.A.

INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATION, RIGOR/RELEVANCE FRAMEWORK,

Instructional Strategies and the Rigor/Relevance Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 3

The Daggett System for Effective Instruction

Elements of Instructional Leadership

Traditional Teaching Frameworks Daggett System for Effective Instruction

What teachers should do What the entire system should do

Teachers deliver instruction Teachers facilitate learning

Focus on teaching Focus on learning

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 5

Transforming Teaching and Leading

Vision set by top leadership Vision set by all

Principal leads Team leads

“Deliver” instruction “Facilitate” learning

6 Rigorous Learning Toolkit

Understanding the Rigor/Relevance

The Knowledge Taxonomy

The Application Model

1. Knowledge in one discipline

3. Apply across disciplines Acquisition Application

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 7

The Rigor/Relevance Framework

8 Rigorous Learning Toolkit

Multiple Knowledge Taxonomies

Taxonomy was updated and revised by a group of cognitive psychologists led by

Another version of a knowledge taxonomy is Norman L. Webb’s Depth of Knowledge,

In 2007, Robert Marzano proposed his New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.

Cross-Reference of Knowledge Taxonomies

Knowledge Remembering Knowledge Retrieval

Analysis Analyzing Analysis

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 9

The Relationship Taxonomy

Levels Student-Teacher Relationship

10 Rigorous Learning Toolkit

Verb List by Quadrant

Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D

Describe Construct Compare Create

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 11

Instructional Strategies and the

Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D

Key Less than ideal Suitable Ideal

12 Rigorous Learning Toolkit

Engagement Routines by Quadrant

Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D

Key Less than ideal Suitable Ideal

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 13

Application Model Decision Tree

14 Rigorous Learning Toolkit

Student Work Products by Quadrant

Some student work products can be used in multiple quadrants.

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 15

Teacher Question Stems by Quadrant

Ask questions to recall facts, make Ask questions to apply or relate:

Technology Use by Quadrant

Lists Searching Searching Commenting

Running a RSS Feed

Rigorous Learning Toolkit 17