In late July, I called my ELA besties around the country to weigh in on some ideas for American Lit. There is an existing district scope and sequence, and from what I’ve gathered, there have been some needed tweaks and adjustments to the common assessments: mostly scheduling and cohesion, but some adjustments nonetheless.
One of my skill sets is backward planning, and I am forever a fan of UBD (Wiggins/McTighe), so I put together, with their help, a curated list of materials, and planned to incorporate the district’s scope and assessment focus/questions. I mention UBD because I can absolutely plan the beast out of PLC work and common assessments. This is going to be my 19th time at the rodeo.
I love working with my department head on these ideas; she’s receptive and collaborative and helps add focus. We both laughed when we met and agreed we are verbal processors, and she is skilled at listening to my processing. She understands the notion of “work in progress” and how my drafts are designed. We will interweave the skills necessary and develop assessments that are authentic and hopefully, engaging.
And here is the thing: if I could really get new and veteran ELA teachers to understand one important concept, the text is somewhat immaterial. What matters is the combination of skills, strategies, and standards working cogently and effectively for students’ growth and learning. These must be transferable, quantifiable, and reflective processes for students to make learning stick. Whether or not one spends six weeks on “The Crucible” or one week on The Great Gatsby isn’t the priority: when developing continuity and robust instruction in curriculum, always circle back to the three S’s.
I’m currently listening to (and then checking back in with the text) of How to Hide an Empire by Daniel Immerwahr. Chapter 17 which discusses measurements and standards. And while the United States is still not on the metric system, part of that global domination plan (colonization is so 1700s) is to make the world standardized. For better or worse, the CCSS did make an attempt to standardized instruction. Many states didn’t adopt the Common Core, and many parents and school boards unfortunately conflated the Core with standardized testing. TL:DR high-stakes testing sucks. The standards aren’t bad. They’re vague enough so that educators can put their spin and instructional design on them but clear enough to give focus and direction. His writing reminded me of educational standards, the Science of Reading debacle, and how research can support or defame just about any topic in education. It’s messy.
If we want to clear up this mess, we focus on the skills, strategies and standards in our content areas and create these as our framework.
That’s it. Make the bolts fit the nuts. Or something like that.







