Intellectual character

Classrooms offer daily opportunities to integrate truth-seeking lessons, whether that means teaching students to question where information comes from or to emphasize the civic value of seeking out multiple perspectives — including seeking to hear the points of view of those with whom they might disagree. Teachers themselves put truth-seeking into practice in their assessment of students, in selecting high-quality data and assessments and making sure to consider multiple sources and types of data. No single measure can tell the whole truth about a student — and neither can poor quality assessments. Truth-seeking pushes us to seek out rich and highly informative data that allows us to best support and guide our students’ learning.

Policy preferences at the school or district-level — or even at the level of states and countries — are often formed on the basis of a single type of data (such as standardized test scores or anecdotal evidence). Yet a single source of data rarely provides the rich portrait needed to guide Principled Innovation. Even though many of us understand this in theory, it can be tempting to overemphasize the data that is easily available and appears to offer clarity, rather than requiring us to dig more deeply into other more complex, nuanced, and “messy” sources of information. As Principled Innovators, we must take the time to understand a range of perspectives (Practice C2) and develop inclusive approaches to gathering data in order to have a solid footing for ethical decision-making (Practice M2).