How Do I Lead Project Based Learning? – Begin with the End in Mind #RealPBL (part 2 of 4)

The following is the second of four excerpts from the eBook, How Do I Lead Project Based Learning?, which provides a concrete framework for leading the implementation of project based learning. Although this eBook was written through the lens of project based learning, everything can be applied to all professional learning and instructional shifts, no matter the content. Originally, the eBook’s content was the final chapter of the book, Project Based Learning: Real Questions. Real Answers.

The four drivers of instructional shifts serve as the basis for the eBook: establish relationships and trust, begin with the end in mind, model best practice, evaluate professional learning.

Begin with the End in Mind

For instructional shifts, beginning with the end in mind can be broken down into four distinct categories.

Start with Why

When we lead an instructional shift, chances are we’ve spent countless hours pouring over its content, deciding how it should be rolled out, thinking about how it will impact teachers, staff, students, etc. Of course, all of this planning is necessary if we want the instructional shift to be successful. At the same time we have to remember, everything we learn doesn’t reach our people unless we actually communicate the learning. For example, if two educators have almost no knowledge of project based learning, but then one of them decides to read Project Based Learning: Real Questions. Real Answers. and attend a three-day workshop on the topic, the other educator’s knowledge of project based learning is not affected; she still knows next to nothing. While this conclusion may sound like a given, it’s easy to start to believe something should be common sense to others simply because we have taken the time to educate ourselves. We can never over-communicate why we’re doing what we’re doing (and how we’re going to make it happen), even though it may be common sense to us. 

Also, according to John Kotter (2010), one of the biggest mistakes we can make when attempting to achieve buy-in “is to communicate with all ‘head’ and no ‘heart’” (p. 186). In other words, the odds are not in favor of teachers saying, “If [insert researcher] says this is what’s best, then we should all be doing it in our classrooms!” While research certainly has its place, we can first appeal to others by having dialogue (not monologue) in which we discuss in practical terms how our students will benefit from the instructional shift, while also discussing how teachers and staff will be supported.

Establish Learning Goals

As explained in the Introduction of Project Based Learning: Real Questions. Real Answers., when we focus on a topic (e.g., three branches of government) as opposed to what we want students to know, understand, and be able to do, we end up with surface-level learning that lacks direction. Not so surprisingly, the same can be said for adult learning. Yes, we can start with an instructional approach (such as project based learning), but at some point we need to drill down to (1) what educators should know, understand, and be able to do as a result of their professional learning and (2) how students should be impacted by the instructional shift.

When we start to plan professional learning, we determine all of the learning targets participants will have to tackle in order to be successful, while keeping in mind these targets should correlate with our desired shifts in student learning. Then, we arrange these targets in the order in which they should be learned. Next, while maintaining their order, we divide up the learning targets according to the total number of professional learning sessions. They may not be divided up evenly, but rather according to how much can be accomplished; not all learning targets require the same amount of attention. Finally, we brand each session with an Umbrella Question that encompasses all of its learning targets.

When facilitating professional learning, the current session’s Umbrella Question and learning targets should be communicated to participants toward the beginning of the session and then possibly again at the end to bring closure to the learning. To demonstrate where the current session falls within the context of the entire instructional shift, we also review the Umbrella Question and learning targets from the previous session, if one exists. 

We can create and list the learning targets and then follow with activities that help participants to hit these targets. Another approach is to name each activity after the learning target it’s helping to hit. The PBL Paralysis graphic outlines the agenda for a three-day workshop I recently facilitated, when I took the latter approach while mostly using learning targets in the form of questions.

Communicate Micro Expectations

Based on my experiences, this step is when the majority of instructional shifts tend to fall apart. For example, many schools and districts ask teachers to facilitate project based learning without clarifying what it actually involves. Instead, minimum expectations (or micro expectations) can be established for what should be taking place across every experience a school or district labels as project based learning. 

These micro expectations can be the components of the project planning process. Here’s what I recommend: project title, High Impact Content & Supporting Content, High Impact Takeaways, Umbrella Question, learning targets, formative assessments (which include the Progress Assessment Tool), optional summative assessments, direct instruction (proactive, reactive, learning detours), reflection, publishing. Also, from the seven essential project design elements from PBLWorks, we can consider adding on: sustained inquiry, authenticity, and student voice & choice. Any school or district can adopt all (or some) of these components and use them as a starting point when determining what’s expected.

The project planning template can bring consistency to the planning process across a school or district – consistency that supports peer assessment as educators collaborate to enhance each other’s work. In addition, some components are more visible during classroom observations because they’re an ongoing part of teaching and learning: Umbrella Question, formative assessments (which guide instruction), direct instruction, reflection, publishing, sustained inquiry, and student voice & choice.

For these visible components we can think about creating a modified Progress Assessment Tool that can be used by teachers and administrators to assess the implementation of project based learning. Along with having a column to list the components (far-left) and a column for feedback (far-right), it can contain columns for (1) teacher design, and (2) success criteria that represents what each component should look like in action. As much as possible, success criteria should be observable and written in terms of student learning, not teacher instruction. The figure below shows what a row could look like for an Umbrella Question, and I think schools and districts could benefit from the critical process of creating their own Progress Assessment Tool that includes all visible components.

In order to not overwhelm teachers, we can first make sure everyone is comfortable using a common project planning template – something I consider to be essential for schools and districts looking to implement project based learning on a systemic scale. If we then want to bring further consistency to this implementation, when the majority of teachers become proficient with the template, we can transition to co-creating (or distributing) a modified Progress Assessment Tool that focuses on what PBL should look like in action. A final option is to instead use one all-encompassing assessment tool that includes both the visible components and the non-visible (e.g., project title, High Impact Content & Supporting Content, High Impact Takeaways, etc.). For the non-visible components the success criteria column would simply remain blank. 

Finally, while I do believe every school or district should have a list of components that serve as minimum expectations, we caution against reducing project based learning (or any practice) to nothing more than a list. After all, it’s quite possible teachers will be able to check all of the “project based learning boxes” without actually having students engage in meaningful learning. We can also consider our experiences and observations from our time with students, as well as the means by which our implementation of project based learning can be evaluated (more on evaluation later in this eBook).

Communicate Macro Expectations

While micro expectations are what should be taking place at the classroom level, macro expectations are what should be taking place across a school or district. In Chapter 8 of Project Based Learning: Real Questions. Real Answers., some options are listed:

• Implement at least [insert number] components of project based learning.
• Engage your students in at least [insert number] project based learning experience(s).
• Engage your students in at least [insert duration] of project based learning.

With multiple options at our disposal, we can differentiate macro expectations based on students’ strengths and needs, teacher comfort level, the demands of the content, and available resources. By engaging students in several shorter projects, as opposed to 1-2 long projects, teachers are able to make mistakes, learn from mistakes, and then promptly apply what they’ve learned to the next projects. And for students who aren’t used to project based learning, shorter projects can be less overwhelming.