Defining the Post-Pandemic New Normal: 6 Things to Think About for School Reopening

By Denise Collier, Rosita Apodaca, Glenn Nolly

Institute for Learning

In the past year, the COVID-19 pandemic and related school closures have upended the educational apple cart for school leaders, teachers, students, and their families. Our methods of working with each other and with students had to adapt, our understanding of student engagement was challenged, the importance of relationships was brought to the fore, and the realities of educational inequities were illuminated in stark new ways.

But with these challenges came new opportunities: a chance to rethink how we do our work, to revisit what is most important, and a rare opportunity to examine some of our practices and priorities in fundamental ways. We believe there is a need to examine the impact of standardized testing on teaching, learning, and equity, and we propose 6 things to rethink as we design the new post-pandemic normal.

Why is our educational system so invested in and reliant on standardized testing?

Since the advent of the standards-based reform movement in the early 1990’s, standardized testing systems have become the primary indicator of school quality and student performance. Standardized testing systems, and the learning standards they assess, vary from state-to-state but tend to share some common features: metrics for rating and ranking schools and districts, public reporting of results, systems for rewards and interventions, and a range of consequences for poor performance (Fuhrman and Elmore, 2004; Supovitz, 2009). Individual test-based consequences may include student course failure or graduation denial, teacher and principal pay for performance, and dismissal or transfer of teachers and principals for high failure rates. Organizational consequences may include sanctions applied to schools or districts, such as state “take over” and accreditation denial. School and district ratings can also impact community perceptions of the educational quality in ways that influence political and personal choices (Herman, 2004).

It is our contention, based on our research-informed work in schools and classrooms, that however well-intended, the current system of rewards and sanctions tied to test scores has had an increasingly negative, chilling effect on access to the kinds of meaningful, high-quality learning experiences that are most needed to prepare learners for success in life and help them realize their own aspirations. We further contend that this unintended effect has the most direct impact on students of color, those impacted by poverty, and multi-language learners who enter school with a need to add English proficiency necessary for success in an English-dominant environment. One indicator of this disparate impact is the lack of overall progress and persistent score gap between racial, ethnic, and poverty groups on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exam. Students across all ethnic groups posted lower results in 2019 than in 2017 in 4th grade reading and 8th grade reading and math, particularly affecting African American students, Hispanic students, and students from low-income families (Southern Education Center, 2020, p. 1).

We deeply believe assessment plays a pivotal role in ensuring equitable access to high-quality learning for every student and using a variety of assessments—including broad-scale tests that assess learning within and across states—is important.  But high-stakes testing has become such an overriding part of the landscape in schools and districts that, “like the wallpaper in the room, we have almost become blind to our inordinate focus on them and to the unintended harmful outcomes this type of testing can have on teaching and learning in our schools” (Collier, 2012, p. 27).

The post-pandemic new normal for schooling presents the opportunity to revisit high-stakes testing and make proper use of it so that preparation for the state test does not become the curriculum. Here are six actions that would not take us back to where we were before the pandemic but instead catapult us into a more equitable, student-centered, high quality, thinking curriculum.

Rethinking the
“old normal”

Before Pandemic
After Pandemic

Narrowing the curriculum to tested subjects and grade levels

Broaden and enrich the curriculum for every student

Parsing learning standards into isolated bits of knowledge

Coalesce learning standards into core disciplinary concepts that make sense to learner

Over reliance on teacher directed, test-like practices

Rely on student-centered approaches to advance learning and engagement

Preponderance of low-level tasks

Build the curriculum around cognitively demanding tasks

Absence of student and teacher voice

Engage student and teacher voice, choice, and agency in learning

Curriculum void of students’ funds of knowledge

Students’ funds of knowledge visible in the curriculum


As school and district leaders rethink the new normal, we suggest these might be important shifts to make as we move toward the “new normal.”

1. Broaden and enrich the curriculum for every student

 Narrowing the curriculum to focus on tested content in non-challenging artificial, worksheet-type learning scenarios can have the opposite effect on learning than the one for which we are striving. As Lori Shepard noted in a 2021 podcast, “focus on reading and math tests…has caused social studies and science, art and music to virtually disappear from the curriculum” (National Education Policy Center, 2021). Yet we know that students prosper best in a broad, rich curriculum that speaks to their academic college/career needs and to their interests and personal and cultural identities. There is nothing more inequitable than depriving the most vulnerable students of activities that develop their reasoning and identity. Schools and districts that are fostering equity might revisit their courses and curricular offerings to make sure the test is not high-jacking the rest.

2. Coalesce learning standards into core disciplinary concepts that make sense to learners

Standards are the foundation of the assessment systems states use to measure success, so it follows that standards should articulate fully and clearly what is most important for students to learn. Too often, standards that call for high-level reasoning are omitted from state tests in favor of simpler cognitive processes that can be assessed in multiple choice formats (Olson, 2003).  And we know that not all learning standards are created equally; some carry more weight than others. Cracking them apart into tiny testable bits impedes sense making. Reexamining standards charts, pacing guides, and related tools could reveal the extent to which disciplinary understandings and standards priorities are clear.

3. Rely on student-centered approaches to advance learning and engagement

 Test-prep practices may advance testing skills and perhaps test scores, but it is unlikely they will advance learning in ways that develop deep understandings over time or advance student agency in learning. When students experience learning through student-centered approaches geared to their cognitive, social, and emotional needs, they are more likely to succeed across a variety of measures, including standardized tests. Adopting a core set of proven student-centered approaches that teachers and learners can rely on over time can establish a foundation for deep learning and open opportunities for more equitable access and engagement.

4. Build the curriculum around cognitively demanding tasks

 When teachers match teaching to state tests, “students are likely to experience far more facts and routines than conceptual understanding and problem-solving” (Resnick & Zurawsky, 2002, p. 8). But, if we teach a meaningful curriculum geared to rigorous standards, and if all students regularly engage in challenging and personally relevant learning tasks from kindergarten through high school, then they are much more likely to be prepared for college, work, and life and, also, possess the skills and habits of practice needed to pass exams. Examining curriculum frameworks and resources for the types of texts, tasks, and thinking they require of students could reveal areas for improvement.

5. Engage student and teacher voice, choice, and agency in learning

Overreliance on test results above all other priorities can have an alienating effect on learners. Student engagement is elevated when students know the “why, how, and what” of their learning and have some say in determining it. Just as with adults, students know when they are authentically engaged in their work. Engaging students as co-managers of their learning and of the learning community can look like student choice in texts/tasks, students co-developing curriculum units, and students establishing social routines and contracts for ways of working in the classroom. Focusing on instructional practices and learning opportunities that socialize intelligence advances learning and creates the habits of practice needed for future learning and success.

Overreliance on test results can also have an alienating effect on teachers, impeding commitment to and engagement in their work. Teachers know their discipline, and they also know when they are being engaged in authentic ways as decision-makers in their work. Developing teacher agency in the real work of schooling develops shared understanding and advances coherence. Engaging teachers in policy development, curriculum design, improvement planning, assessment development, peer coaching, and the like advances the work and deepens shared commitment.

6. Students’ funds of knowledge visible in the curriculum

Inviting students’ and their families’ practices and lived experiences into the curriculum validates the students’ identities and provides a bridge from out of school into the classroom. Accurate knowledge of students allows teachers to draw on student experiences and priorities in schooling. This equity-centered approach engages students and boosts learning and achievement. It is an intervention aimed at combating deficit thinking in education that typically privileges white culture.  Researchers argue that “students, especially minority students, will succeed to the extent that household and community participation is encouraged as an integral component of their education.”

In summary, we think it is time to abandon practices that national and international data show are not preparing students for college, career, or community. Instead, we argue that we seize the current opportunity to reset.


Collier, D. (2012). Finding the Goldilocks solution to curriculum and instruction in the era of high-stakes standardized testing. Insight: Texas Association of School Administrators, 27(2), 27-29.

Esteban-Guitart, M., & Moll, L. C. (2014). Funds of Identity: A new concept based on the Funds of Knowledge approach. Culture and Psychology, 20(1), 31-48.

Fuhrman, S.H. & Elmore, R.F. (2004). Introduction. In Susan H. Fuhrman and Richard F. Elmore, (Eds.). Redesigning accountability systems for education, 3-14. New York: Teachers College Press.

Herman, J. L. (2004). The effects of testing on instruction. In Susan H. Fuhrman and Richard F. Elmore, (Eds.). Redesigning accountability systems for education, 141-166. New York: Teachers College Press.

Popham, J. (1999). Why standardized tests don’t measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 8-15.

Resnick, L. and Zurawsky, C. (2005). Standards-based reform and accountability: Getting back on course. American Educator: American Federation of Teachers, pp. 1-13.

Rios- Aguilar. (2010). Measuring funds of knowledge: Contributions to Latina/o students’ academic and nonacademic outcomes. Teachers College Record 112(8), 2209-2257

Shepard, L. (2021). NEPC Talks Education: An Interview with Lorrie Shepard About Standardized Testing Policy. Podcast:

Southern Education Foundation. (2020). 2019 NAEP Report Card Analysis. [White Paper].

Supovitz, J., (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. The Journal of Educational Change, 10(2), 211-227.

Rosita’s Reads June 22

“The improvisational freedom offered in Free Jazz is key to understanding the cues Asian Americans took from African American musicians.”

-ethnomusicologist Susan M. Asai

Many Asian Americans, having been victims of discrimination for years, looked to black politics and forms of cultural expression for inspiration. Read on to learn about how Free Jazz, an avant-garde subgenre that breaks with convention, gave Asian musicians opportunities to infuse music with the political, the historical, and the cultural, and to “cultivate their own musical landscape.”

Rosita’s Reads June 15

“When I go into a hard conversation about identity, I have to be prepared to feel more unsettled than I was before, which I think is exactly why people do not like talking about identity.”

–Podcast host and author Anna Sale

Anna Sale, host of host of WNYC’s podcast Death, Sex & Money and author of Let’s Talk About Hard Things, chatted with NPR host Noel King about getting comfortable with uncomfortable topics. Sale suggests we not be afraid to broach tough subjects and that closure should not be our goal, but rather understanding. An Application of Real-Time Evidence of Their Mathematics Discussions

By Carol Chestnut, Laurie Speranzo, and Michael Telek

Institute for Learning
Agency is the capacity and propensity to take purposeful initiative. [Ferguson, R. F., Phillips, S. F., Rowley, F. S., & Friedlander, J. W., (October 2015)1] Making space forteachers to build their capacity requires providing evidence on which to reflect. When a teacher is alone in their classroom, actively engaged in listening and responding to students during an Accountable Talk discussion, it is near impossible to have a record of the questions asked. The Talkmoves application provides real-time quantified evidence of the questions asked, the categories into which they fall, and a student to teacher talk time comparison. The feedback from the Talkmoves platform provides an opportunity for teacher agency.

The Talkmoves Platform

Talkmoves, designed by the Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of Colorado – Boulder specifically addresses providing real-time feedback related to the use of Accountable Talk moves. Members of the project team have leveraged the IFL’s Accountable Talk Moves to create a platform that provides teachers with feedback on their classroom discussions. It encourages teachers to look at their talk data and decide how they can enhance their own practice. The Colorado team chose classroom talk for analysis because the concepts are based in research and documented classroom outcomes. Victoria Bill and Laurie Speranzo from the Institute for Learning were logical partners for the project because Accountable Talk was established as a teaching tool at the University of Pittsburgh’s Learning Research and Development Center and the IFL fellows have many years of expertise in the field.

How the APP Works: Coding Accountable Talk Moves

The team’s objective was to build an application that would automatically analyze talk from math classroom recordings and provide feedback to aid teachers’ implementation of discussions. The research identified how talk moves can be classified and coded by spending nearly a year teaching the machine talk moves through transcripts and recordings of classroom scenarios. The talk moves were then associated with words and math terms that teachers and students would typically use in a math discussion. In total, 160,000 sentences were coded so that the machine can accurately correlate what is said in classroom discussions to six teacher talk moves and four student talk moves. The moves are broken down in the table.

Institute of Cognitive Science (2019). Talk Moves: Real-time feedback helping mathematics teachers foster effective class discussion, Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Boulder. Retrieved from

Once the technology was in place, field studies gathered feedback from volunteers—21 math teachers from two separate Colorado school districts with their students—who gave TalkMoves a test drive. The field data has been accumulating since 2019. On average, teachers recorded and uploaded ten lessons per teacher for this initial use, Karla Scornavacco, Director of Field Experiences, reported. The program is designed to automatically produce an analysis of their lesson videos. The results of their confidential assessments were typically returned in about an hour and the teachers spent five to ten minutes reviewing the feedback. This is rapid, real-time, personalized feedback.

Application in Action

The process begins with a teacher using their Swivel (a cloud platform video review and collaboration program designed specifically for schools and schools of education) equipment to record and upload their video to the cloud hosting site. (See the TalkMoves website for a more complete description of the equipment.) From there the software automatically takes over, analyzing the lesson in a matter of seconds. An email alerts the teacher that the analysis is available, and they access it by logging into their TalkMoves account.

A wealth of information becomes available when they access the site. Charts and graphs outline four main questions surrounding student and teacher talk, such as:

    • Are students/teachers using talk moves?
    • Which talk moves are they using?
    • Which categories do those moves cover?
    • When are these moves taking place?

Knowing that Accountable Talk discussions need to be accountable to learning community, content knowledge, and rigorous thinking, the graph above indicates that the teacher is asking questions related to all three features of accountability. Seeing that there are significantly more moves related to content knowledge and the learning community, the teacher may recognize the need to plan more questions for rigorous thinking.

You can check out additional the sample feedback by exploring the TalkMoves website at

Beyond looking at raw data points, TalkMoves also monitors what is being said and reports the ongoing trends. It highlights how student/teacher moves change over time, the talk moves they use on average, and how the talk move categories change over time. “I think teachers seem to really like this feature of the application,” said Jennifer Jacobs, faculty member of the Institute of Cognitive Science and Associate Research Professor of science education. “They can really see what they’re doing, and when we talked to them, they usually can make some sense of this.”

For teachers unfamiliar with Talk Moves or how to integrate Accountable Talk discussion into the classroom, there are professional learning resources available on the site that are useful for sharpening Talk Moves skill sets. For those teachers who want to become more proficient at facilitating AT discussions, the experts on Accountable Talk® at the Institute of Learning are always ready to provide professional development to strengthen teacher understanding by describing how AT math discussions encourage student agency.

Potential Uses of the Application to Allow for Teacher Reflection and Agency

Talkmoves provides snapshots over time that can show evolution of practice. Those snapshots can show where one of the features of Accountable Talk is not being attended to, but more importantly, it also tells what is being done with fidelity and where teachers’ pedagogical strengths lie. If colleagues are using the app, discussions in professional learning community (PLC) meetings can center on actual practice and a rich exploration of what is working (and not working) in their math discussions and why. If a teacher using the app is working with a coach, the post-lesson conversations can be grounded in the specific evidence collected by the app. And if a teacher is working alone, the app continues to provide the opportunity to reflect on practice and set pedagogical goals. The Talkmoves team plans on extending this application and related studies, and would like to hear from school districts interested in collaborating on future research.


1Ferguson, R. F., Phillips, S. F., Rowley, F. S., & Friedlander, J. W., (October 2015). The Influence of Teaching Beyond Standardized Test Scores: Engagement, Mindsets, and Agency. Achievement Gap Initiative (AGI) at Harvard University. Seattle, USA: Raikes Foundation. Retrieved from]

Rosita’s Reads June 8

“To improve student achievement, it makes sense to go straight to the source—students. Students can not only share opinions about their classroom experiences, but also play a significant role in school improvement efforts.” – Dana Mitra

Professor and researcher Dana Mitra shares her observations on the experiences of students and teachers working together for school improvement and the positive effects increasing student voice can have on teaching and learning. Read on to learn about how student involvement in the school reform process led to better instruction, better student-teacher relationships, and more empowered students.