The Three Places Your Success Criteria Should Go
In recent years, I’ve worked with numerous teachers and teacher teams who are challenging themselves to bolster clarity in their classrooms. They do so for good reasons. First, it’s grounded in research. John Hattie’s Visible Learning cites clarity as one of the most monumental influencers of student achievement (2012). Not only does clarity have the potential to significantly increase student learning, but it also carries over into other pedagogical “powerhouse factors” such as feedback and assessment-capable learners (Hattie, 2018). If I’ve dipped too deeply into the well of theoretical jargon, here it is more simply:
When students are clear on what it is they are supposed to learn, and what success looks like, they will learn more.
Another reason building clarity appeals to teachers is that it makes sense, and it feels doable. To borrow from Vygotsky, taking what are we already using in the classroom and refining it just a bit is well within our own zone of proximal development. It doesn’t require an advanced degree or a supplemental technology budget either. It simply requires a concerted effort to articulate what “good learning” looks like for any given subject. More importantly, it requires getting that articulation in front of the people actually doing the learning.
If there has ever been a time when we are aware of the value every second, it’s during our reduced instructional minutes of distance and hybrid learning. Trim the fat, and be as precise and concise as possible.
Clear learning intentions can be the first place we look to know what to keep, and what to discard in uncertain times. It makes sense for teachers and for students. So why do we get stuck?
We are pulled in so many directions in education- and often feel like we are moving so fast- that sometimes the only practice that’s consistent is taking attendance. And even that gets forgotten sometimes. Clarity, something that is impactful and straightforward, can take a back seat when a pacing calendar, grades, and emails are vying for our mental energy. (Are you with me on the emails? There are SO MANY!) “Do students know what they are supposed to be learning? How will they know when they’ve learned it?” can easily take a back seat to, “Will I get caught up today?”
One problem is that- even when we do hone in on clarity- it sometimes doesn’t get beyond the confines of our own teacher brains.
Our best efforts- mine included- fizzle out if they remain in the silos of our minds or just one lesson, “that one time I remembered to do it.” I have worked with teachers- fantastic ones- who, over the years, have confided that they meant to get clear learning intentions in front of their students. Or that they want to prioritize success criteria so that students feel like what they’re learning is attainable. Even that next time, they intend to use success criteria so that students can give each other feedback. Kudos to all of us who are marching alone, across the landscapes of our minds, into a silent battle for clarity! But you know what? That’s a really lonely journey if you’re the only one on the path. For clarity to truly flourish, it takes a village.
Clarity works best when it’s in three places: the teacher’s head, the students’ eyeballs, and in the company of trusted colleagues.
Developing success criteria might start as an independent activity, but it shouldn’t end there. Icon attribution: Matthew S. Hall, The Noun Project.
The Teacher’s Head
Maybe this is the easiest part, because it doesn’t require following a bell schedule or managing a classroom. Many of us are accustomed to turning over pedagogical problems in our minds like a Rubik’s cube, whether we are on the clock or not.
The internet is awash with templates and examples you can use. Some teachers prefer a list of skills students must demonstrate to reach success. My go-to is a three-column template I’ve adapted from work with the Hinge Education team, to ensure students have a clear path to surface, deep, and transfer- level learning.
If you’re new to writing out learning intentions, give yourself a time limit. This is not the Declaration of Independence; it’s a short list that will help you- and students- know what successful learning will look like. You are allowed to make it better while you work with students. Keep in mind the following questions, adapted from Rigorous PBL by Design (2017) and Clarity for Learning (2018):
Is this in student-friendly language?
What evidence could students use to show that they have learned?
What words will students need to know, to show evidence of their learning?
Is this free of context? (“Get an A on the test”, or “Complete this cool project”, or “Summarize Chapter 8” are examples of context. Keep it out.)
Getting success criteria in front of students, or co-creating success criteria with them, makes clarity a little messy and a lot more meaningful. Icon attribution: Prosymbols, The Noun Project.
2. The Students’ Eyeballs
This is where success criteria become equally powerful and messy. When students use success criteria to measure their own- ahem- success, the work really comes to life.
The first time I used success criteria with my students, I posted it in giant letters on my bulletin board. Every time we began an activity, I would walk over to the board and point to which success criteria we were aiming for with our work. It became a road map throughout our project and helped us understand why our activities were relevant. Consequentially, throughout that project, I found myself discarding built-in activities that I had done for years, because I realized they didn’t align with what we were trying to learn.
My students dragged the icons to represent where they were in their learning. At this point in my unit, most felt they were at a proficient (or deep) level of ability.
Using success criteria to orient students around what they’re learning- as I did my first time around- is a good start. It’s even stronger, however, when students can use the success criteria to see the progress in their own learning. Using success criteria to help learners articulate their progress can help take something abstract: “Where am I in my learning?”, and make it more concrete: “I can do the things listed at a level two, but there are a few more things I need to master to be at a level three.”
I’ve seen teachers print success criteria on a half sheet of paper, and periodically ask students to circle where they are on the paper. The same routine works using google docs; students can revisit a list of success criteria and highlight the parts they feel the’ve mastered, or even color code the areas where they are still struggling. In wiggly elementary classrooms, students enjoy moving sticky notes with their names on them, to pictures on a bulletin board that represent different success criteria. My current favorite is to open Pear Deck session with Google Slides, so that as a community of learners we can all see our progress. It works great virtually and in-person, and is linked here.
One of my most memorable high school teachers used to tell us, “The message is in the receiver.” It was an annoying truth to contest with as a teenager, but it comes to mind frequently as a teacher. If I’ve developed success criteria but my students never see it for themselves, or don’t really understand how it relates to learning, my message stopped short of being truly received.
All the answers are in the room. Icon attribution: Makim Kulikov, The Noun Project.
3. In the company of trusted colleagues
If “in your own head” is the easy part, and “in front of students’ eyes” is the messy part, then this is the juicy part. Is success measured in the same ways, between teachers who are teaching the same grade level and content area? Do we have a common (and safe) way to examine our impact on student learning?
Research suggests that, in many schools, the answer is no. Variability within schools is actually far greater than variability between different schools (Hattie, 2017). In other words, an outstanding argumentative essay in my class might be considered mediocre in my partner teacher’s class. But we were both teaching the same thing, and we both think we have high expectations for our students. Ouch.
Getting success criteria in front of a team of teachers- or, if you teach a class alone, in front of a colleague that you trust, is a strong way to draw on the collective wisdom of other professionals. It can also be totally scary. Asking the group, “Do these look right? Is it rigorous enough?”, requires vulnerability from the asking teacher or team of teachers. But it can also be a first step to creating a system with common definitions of success.
In What Works Best in Education: The Politics of Collaborative Expertise, Hattie writes, “Evaluating impact asks schools and systems to be clearer about what it means to be good at various disciplines, to be clearer about what a year’s progress looks like and to provide staff with collaborative opportunities to make these decisions.”
There is a clear value in bringing success criteria into the light, together. Teacher teams can develop their own efficacy when they see what is working and what isn’t. Understanding our impact can remain vague unless success criteria and students’ work are both present in our work as teams. They help us to see patterns, identify where students are struggling, and reflect on which interventions are working to bring our students closer to our shared definition of success.
If a team has developed success criteria together, then looking at student work has a new cornerstone around which the team can orient themselves. Not a standardized test, but a bar developed with your own real students in mind.
In the wake of constant changes, many teachers are investing their efforts into building clarity. Whether in traditional or distance learning, those efforts are worth it: the return on teachers’ investment is potential for significant learning. But those returns are even greater in the company of fellow learners. Let them in on the journey.
Resources:
Almarode, J & Vandas, K. (2018). Clarity for Learning. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin.
Hattie, John. (2012). Visible learning for teachers : maximizing impact on learning. London ; New York : Routledge
Hattie, John. (2015). What Works Best in Education: The Politics of Collaborative Expertise. London: Pearson.
Hattie, John. (2018). Visible Learning Feedback. [Webinar.] Corwin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfHQAQCAqtw
McDowell, Michael. (2017). Rigorous PBL by Design. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin.
