Skip to main content

Rigor Redefined


      For years now in education, one of the biggest buzzwords has been “Rigor.”  It was universally agreed, or at least seemingly so, that all students need to be challenged.  Students need hard work and need to be worked hard.  In theory, this sounds good and probably is good.

      However, it seems that educators and lay people alike might have interpreted “rigor” as just more of the same.  If a test has 50 questions, then 100 are more rigorous.  If a student might normally write a five-page essay, then a 10-page one is more rigorous.  If a student might have two hours of homework, then four hours is more rigorous.
      Some of this classic definition of rigor was also related to the bell curve.  In other words, only a handful of students could actually reach the top, be academic or be working at rigorous levels.  Indeed, there was a built-in elitism here in that most people were not supposed to make it. 
      The 21st century workplace and educational system cannot afford to have people who don’t make it.  The bell curve is archaic, outdated and counterproductive. 


     The flaw with this traditional definition of rigor here is that more is not necessarily better.  What could be better is something really better, something different or maybe even something deeper.  Yes, it’s time to redefine rigor in the contemporary sense as it really relates to higher-level learning and 21st century skills.

    The dominant paradigm and experience in most educational settings has been that learning was memorizing vast amounts of information.  For example, if one memorized a list of sophisticated vocabulary words and could define and spell them correctly, then that was seen as rigorous.  Indeed, even at advanced levels of secondary learning for important milestones like SAT, AP, etc., we focused on some low level definitions of “rigor.”
      As we prepare students now for truly higher level learning that requires the successful mastery and demonstration of the Four C’s (Creativity, Critical Thinking, Collaboration and Communication), it seems we can do better in defining rigor.
      What is more rigorous - writing an essay about business or starting the actual business? 
      What is more rigorous - writing a research report or presenting your findings in a formal presentation to a group of experts in the real world? 
      What is more rigorous - answering 100 math questions on a handout or quiz, or applying a math principle to a real world problem-solution scenario and then testing it?
      Naturally, I could create hundreds of these examples.  The theme here is that learning, especially rigorous learning at a higher level, is not a passive experience where one performs some mundane low-level task repetitively, bur rather where one demonstrates the application of learning in a real-world, professional manner that is public and relevant.



      This will challenge many of our academic conventions.  Current systems such as AP classes, the A-G requirements and even college entrance tests do not address this new definition of rigor.  The new Common Core State Standards will address this transition to some degree.  But it will not be enough. 
      We will have to ask one another what is learning?   And more importantly, we need to ask what is learning at a higher level that is truly rigorous?
Our true definition of rigor should be based on how far a student goes in their learning.  Do they just skim the surface or truly invest themselves into a project or pursuit that forces them to interact and think a such high levels that they will have a different and better learning experience? 
       Rigor, or what is academic, has to now be judged on new criteria.  A student that designs a BBQ grill digitally, then builds the BBQ grill, then features this item on their project website or even sells it, would be seen as just as advanced, or even more so, than the student who scored a high percentage on a multiple choice math test.  Rigor will be about what one produces in a professional sense vs. what one accomplishes on paper or in a grade book. 
        Finally, back to the bell curve.  Economically and culturally, we have to want and believe that all students can learn and learn at high levels.  We need all students to seek and reach this new definition or rigor.  They might be pursuing different things.  However, they can all be involved in deeper critical thinking, more creativity and individually presenting professional and public work.  The bell curve’s days are over and rigor as we used to know it is too. 
(images courtesy of Minarets High School)

Comments

  1. I am committed to working alongside you to change those structures by which our schools are evaluated, to allow for a new vision of rigor! Well done!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Five Ways To Make All Students Into Lead Learners (Teachers)

It has been established long ago that the highest form of learning is teaching. When one is put in the position to teach others, one learns the content and concepts at the highest applied level in order to successfully communicate it to others. This reality has led many educators long ago to turn as much of the instruction in their classroom over to students through student presentations, projects and more. That being said, too many students still never have this opportunity to become Lead Learners - where they learn at the highest level by having the responsibility of teaching others. Here are five ways all educators can expand the opportunity for all students to learn at the highest level by all becoming teachers: STUDENTS AS PROFESSIONAL PRESENTERS
Again, students have been giving presentations in many cases for years in certain courses. I suppose even the early  years of Show & Tell were intended to have every student present, or tell a story. Well, we need to challenge all of ou…

8 Lessons From The FFA For All Of Education

I was never an Agriculture or FFA student. Indeed, I have never been an Ag or FFA teacher. I have never taken an Ag Science or Ag Elective class. Actually, aside from eating food produced by the Ag industry, I’ve never even done much of anything related to the work that the Ag Community does.

However, as the former principal of Minarets High School, I got to witness and be a part of the great work that the FFA does, and has always done, that we can all learn from.

In fact, it seems that much of what we are trying to do with 21st century education and skill development, the FFA has always done. When it comes to what industry and the economy seems to be demanding from our students, the FFA has seemingly incorporated all of it from day one.


When I became the principal of Minarets High School (Minarets High School) in 2008, the school did not exist  yet. We were tasked, among other things, with having a dynamic Ag Science & Natural Resources Pathway. With that in mind, we decided to ma…

If We're Banning Phones, We Won't Connect Our Students To The Future

For those of us that follow the news, especially education news, we don’t have to wait very long for an educator, or educators, to give us the excuse for a blog post. This week’s winner goes to the principal and staff at Korematsu Middle School in California’s East Bay Area.
They were recently featured, and apparently heralded, by an article in  Ed Source (http://bit.ly/EdSourceCellPhones) for their recent compliance and control upgrade that bans students from using their cell phones at lunch and during their free time. According to principal Matthew Burnham, they tried to let the 7th and 8th grade students use their cell phones last year during these times and it was, according to them, an abysmal failure. The school claims that due to the students being “glued” to their cell phones, no one was talking and interacting with one another. And after watching the movie “Screenagers” and drinking from that proverbial firehose of biased information, this school was trying to …