ed ideas

Why I Teach...

2010-04-15T10:26:00.000-07:00

Today, a former student, C.J., came into my classroom during the lunch break to say hello.

"I started to love reading because of your class," she said.

I've been asked what I like about teaching and I've written a million "My Educational Philosophy" papers. None of what I've been able to articulate is as accurate as her simple statement.

C.J. summed up why I love teaching in 9 words.

Self-Efficacy & Parental Involvement in the Urban Classroom

2010-04-13T12:38:00.000-07:00

Albert Bandura’s definition of self-efficacy is “belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action to produce given attainments.” In other words, in order to accomplish a complicated task, one must believe they can do it in the first place. Self-efficacy (or lack of self-efficacy) manifests itself daily in the classroom. Students who have trouble reading or writing tend to act out, disrupt others, or avoid attending school in the first place. Considering Bandura’s definition, these reactions are not surprising. As humans, we like doing what comes naturally to us, and, when we struggle with a task, we tend to avoid that task altogether.
Karen Wood & William Blanton (2009), authors of Literacy Instruction for Adolescents, tell us:

When a respected person (e.g., teacher, friend, family member) who possesses a skill tells a listener that he or she can also acquire that skill, the listener is likely to internalize that belief. Although there are exceptions, persuading someone that he or she can acquire a skill is not likely successful unless the speaker possesses the skill (94).

This idea is significant because, if a student does not have someone in their life that reads and expresses to them the importance of literacy, that student is likely to lack self-efficacy in the classroom. Many times, in low-income, urban schools, students come from single parent households. In these cases, students are less likely to see role-models reading or examples of good literacy habits. Postelhwaite & Ross (1992) posit that “parental involvement in all its various forms…was the single best predictor of student achievement in reading for grades 2 and 8.” If this is the case, how can low-income, urban schools be expected to compete with their suburban counterparts? If reading self-efficacy comes from parents, and parents aren't present, how can we expect to engage the students in school?

We are stuck in a system pushing us to “compete”--- a “Race to the Top.” However, the idea of student self-efficacy and parental involvement (or lack of) is never taken into account when deciding “achievement.” All students are judged by the same standards despite having different backgrounds. Rather than using achievement test data to inform instruction and improve upon deficits, they are being used to punish students who lack both self-efficacy and the advantages of strong parental involvement.

References
Postlethwaite, T.N., & Ross, K.N. (1992) Effective schools in reading: Implications for policy Planners. The Hague: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

Wood, K., & Blanton, W. (2009). Literacy Instruction for Adolescents: Research-Based Practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

The "Noblest of Careers"

2010-04-12T10:37:00.000-07:00

Great editorial written by CPS teacher Michaelene Kelly. Definitely worth a read.

Ravitch's Response

2010-04-12T09:24:00.000-07:00

I had the pleasure of seeing Diane Ravitch speak last Friday at UIC. I have always been intrigued by people who change their views on important topics. During the elections, these people are called "flip-floppers" but I believe this to be a misnomer. A flip-flopper is one who can't decide what they want for lunch---peanut butter & jelly, grilled cheese, or a salad. On important issues however, changing your mind is a sign of intellectual curiosity, deep reflection, and courage. Dr. Ravitch was a staunch supporter of NCLB when the bill first emerged in 2002. However, as time has proven, NCLB has poisoned America's school system. Ravitch, as she said on Friday--was wrong about NCLB. For some reason, we view unwavering support of issues as political strength--even if the support is brain-dead allegiance. Leaders feel that supporting an issue from the beginning proves something---and that changing your mind is a sign of weakness.
The reason I chose to write about Dr. Ravitch is because we all can learn something from her. Dr. Ravitch once believed (along with about 90% of congress) that NCLB would provide information to improve schools. However, eight years later, she has found that NCLB is only good for punishing schools and belittling teachers. As a result, she has changed her thinking--and is speaking out against Race to the Top.

And people are listening! Her book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education, is 16th on the New York Times best seller list...and the book is sold out just about everywhere.

When's the last time people were buying a book about public education?

From the "Factory Model" to Student-Centered

2010-04-08T10:32:00.000-07:00

The current “factory” model of public education prevents students from being viewed as individuals. If one were to step foot into a Chicago Public School classroom, one is likely to see about thirty-five desks in rows, facing a whiteboard. Further, when reading class begins, the teacher is faced with instructing 35 unique individuals with different ability levels how to read. This is a difficult, if not impossible, task even in a classroom with 35 students who read at the same or similar level. In most regular, non-select enrollment CPS high schools, a reading teacher is faced with teaching to an entire spectrum of reading abilities. Surely, in this type of setting, students, regardless of their ability, will probably never receive the individualized attention that they need to improve themselves as readers. Adding to this already difficult situation is the fact that we currently live in an age of data and accountability. Students, teachers, and entire schools are being judged by high-stakes, standardized tests. Consequently, principals and teachers are feeling the pressure to improve reading test scores by changing their focus from content based curriculum to a test-prep based curriculum. This is significant because relevant, engaging reading selections are being replaced with test-based reading passages and questions. As a result, instead of reading instruction that promotes divergent and critical thinking, students who already struggle with reading and writing are forced to converge on one “right” answer. With the age of accountability has come prescriptive, unidividualized, literacy instruction.

The opposite of the “factory” model of teaching would be a student- centered approach to reading instruction. Instruction that is truly student-centered affirms the life experience, multiple-intelligence, and learning style of each student in class. In a student centered classroom, reading passages with questions would then be replaced with engaging, relevant, and thought-provoking texts that take into account the background of the specific student population. The only way to truly honor individualism in the classroom is to make students co-creators of the curriculum. Only when students have ownership over what they learn will they truly be engaged in their own literacy development. Engagement with meaningful texts, then, is a major prerequisite to literacy achievement.

The Fight Against Standardized Tests

2010-02-05T08:55:00.001-08:00

It has been a while since I last posted. It has been even longer since I updated you about my 11th graders' quest to fix America's standardized testing problem.

We have not given up! In fact, our attempt has gotten more intense and focused with each passing day.

On Monday of this week, I handed out the assignment. I called it "Social Action Project." What a creative title!

Students have a choice of 5 options. They can:

Write an op-ed piece for the Chicago Sun-Times or Tribune about how standardized tests are hurting students.

Write a letter to Sen. Durbin, Sen. Burris, Rep. Danny Davis, Sec. Duncan, and CEO Huberman about the ill-effects of testing.

Create an "Anti-Standardized Test" petition and obtain 200 signatures.

Contact ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, or WGN and try set up a press conference or interview.

Create your own project.

Today was a very productive day. Students were working hard putting together their letters, essays, and petitions. February 17th is the due date.

Here are a few excerpts from students' rough drafts:

Tiara: "My passion in life is to be successful, to grasp every ounce of knowledge I possibly can. However, with the barriers that the ACT brings, it is nearly impossible to succeed. My point is that the test sets us up to fail. It is an unfair tool in determining a student's intelligence."

Tashiara: "I have bad experiences with testing...but I have a 3.7 GPA."

Tramone & DaJuan: "...students are usually from low-income families and also suffer many problems with housing, nutrition, or health care. Testing punishes us for things we cannot control."

More to come...

Call to Action

2010-01-19T09:06:00.000-08:00

Pardon me if you find this entry controversial. I've been meaning to write it for a few weeks.

I've been thinking a lot lately about my students---who they are, where they come from, and what they think.

I am alarmed by their blatant lack of interest, motivation, and effort towards school.

A teacher friend once told me that the youth are a reflection of the adults in their lives. More specifically, if the youth are misguided, it is usually the adults have negatively influenced them. Instead of placing blame solely on students for lack of interest in school, we must direct some of that blame towards the adults.

I agree with this idea--but not wholeheartedly.

First of all, I'd like to tell you a little about who my students are. Most come from low-income, single parent households. If you didn't already know, low-income students from urban areas are faced with a docket of hindrances that get in the way of their learning. In the case of my students, when their basic needs are not being met, it is very difficult for them to focus 100% on education. This is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, and I do believe it applies to my students.

For the most part, I cannot sympathize with my students. I came from a middle-class household, with two parents. My situation growing up was very different from most of the students--and I understand that and I do empathize.

However, I am desperately trying to figure out where this lack of interest in education comes from. Earlier this week, CPS observed Martin Luther King, Jr. day. What would he think of what goes on in our schools? Who would he blame for the disinterest in education? Parents? Students? Society?

King dedicated his life to make sure all children had access to a good education. Despite the struggle, we still have a generation of children who are not serious about learning to read, write, or think critically. Not only are there children who flat out don't care about school, but public schools are riddled with pockets of students who have little respect for peers who care deeply about education.

So where do you think it comes from? Is it the parents? Schools? Teachers? Principals? Does this general malaise and rejection of education just some how magically manifest itself?

I am not one who believes in the "Bootstraps" philosophy. However, at the end of the day, no matter who you are or where you are from, you have to look at yourself in the mirror. If you can't look at yourself seriously and see why education is vital, then it is hard to imagine anyone taking you seriously.

Yes, it is up to the schools, teachers, and principals to guide students along the way. However, schools, teachers, and principals cannot physically hold a book for each student or move a pencil across a paper--at some point, students & parents must take it upon themselves.

John Dewey said that children are not empty vessels and education cannot be poured into them like liquid. He meant that students must be active participants in their own learning process. However, can't the same metaphor be used for motivation & effort? Wouldn't Dewey also agree that a teacher cannot fill a student with motivation and effort? When all is said and done, there must be an intrinsic spark that comes from the student or one that is catalyzed by loved ones.

We talk about "acheivement" and, as stakeholders, we spend countless hours trying to make public schools better centers of learning. However, this will not happen with a magic pill. There is no panacea---no single-facet that will change the game. For the most part, teachers are pulling their weight. But we cannot carry it all.

Teachers constantly hear lectures and read books about making school relevant to students. This is something that most teachers work tirelessly to achieve. However, not everything is going to be easy, interesting, or relevant. Most of the time learning the basics isn't fun--but more times than not, these basic skills build a foundation that allow students to do what they love.

Malcolm X's story is a beautiful illustration of how education can transform one's life. Throughout his life, he had several different names, each representative of a stage in his life. He was Malcolm Little, then "Detroit Red", then "Satan"--and just when he thought his life was going nowhere, he transformed himself with education. Through books, "Satan" (as Malcolm was known when he was in prison) transformed himself into Malcolm X. Then, as he continued to read, write, and think critically, he became El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. His name changes are not only symbolic of his personal transformations, but also his increased level of education.

Malcolm's story is an extreme case. We tell our youth that taking education seriously keeps you out of bad places and on the right path. This is something that Malcolm learned the hard way. The point is, my students can tell you about Malcolm, Martin, and Barack. I am sure they saw, read, or heard Barack's speech on education at least a half dozen times. However, despite these powerful messages by iconic men, the messages are not being absorbed---maybe heard, but not listened to or acted upon. So if these giants of history can't impart wisdom on our youth, who can?

Many reform efforts focus on closing schools, firing teachers, or turning schools around. But I believe the solution is much easier than that. Schools must once again become centers for learning. In order for this to happen, parents need to become involved with the education of their children, schools must begin to cater to the emotional, social, and academic needs of its students, and "the powers that be" need to stop operating schools like factories.

If this isn't accomplished, we will continue to lose a generation of children.

Huberman's School Safety Plan

2010-01-12T18:51:00.000-08:00

Catalyst Chicago just released details on Ron Huberman's CPS safety plan. In short, $30 million made available through Obama's stimulus will be put towards 38 CPS schools deemed "at risk" by Huberman. The money will go towards truancy officers, security, and social workers.

Anything that makes our children safer is positive. But where was this money last year? Two years ago? Five years ago? Instead of being proactive, CPS has become increasingly reactive as a result of cutting corners in order to save money. It is similar to the recent airport security issue; only after something bad happens does the issue get attention. Then, after a few weeks, months, or years, the issue is put on the back burner.

The truth is, this money should have always been there.

Anyway, the article is definitely thought provoking and worth taking a look at.

Losing Sight

2010-01-12T10:25:00.000-08:00

With each passing administration, Americans are losing sight of what it means to be well-educated. In the age of accountability--where standards reign supreme--we neglect to ask ourselves just how all of this will help make our school children happy, healthy, and productive citizens of America.

As educational stakeholders, we find ourselves in a major predicament. But it isn't hard to see how we got here. When power is taken away from teachers, students, and parents, and placed in the hands of detached politicians and higher-ups who know very little about what goes on in American classrooms, things are bound to fail. Top-down management may work in business, but it will never work with schools.

Our obsession with quantification has hurt our children the most. Not only is standardized curriculum and testing unfair to our children, it is downright lazy. Standardized testing exists for one major reason: It would cost way too much money to get to know each student on a personal basis and understand his strengths, hopes, and goals. So, instead, we give a kid a scan-tron, a pencil, and an hour---run the paper through the machine and, voila, we have an "accurate" reading. It is cheap, it doesn't take up time, and it gives us "data."

This would be good if we were talking about a widget. But kids aren't widgets. They're human beings.

In the last decade or so, curriculum specialists have discussed the importance of planning with the end in mind. So much so that "backwards mapping" has become somewhat of an educational buzzword. (For example, in order to master a standard, a teacher would ask herself "In order to master this skill, what activities and assessments do I need to give my students in order to get them there?") I believe this is a great theory--starting with the end in mind--kind of like a road map. However, decision makers are not starting with the end in mind--they are starting with the end of high school and the beginning of college. Last time I checked, life does not end there.

Road maps have different routes; people choose different ways to get to get to the same place. Some take the scenic route and some choose the quickest way.

What does this mean for schools?

What if, instead of backwards mapping a standard or a test, students backwards-mapped their own lives? How would that change how things are done in school? Certainly, test preparation and standardized tests wouldn't be a part of the curriculum. Neither would tracking, suspension, or expulsion.

Look at the real world. What does it take for a human being to be happy, healthy, productive, and successful? This is how we should be building our curricula and our schools.

Ad Nauseum

2010-01-08T10:23:00.000-08:00

Recently, SOE Duncan unveiled new criteria for "turning-around" struggling high schools. Catalyst Chicago recently released a list of CPS high schools that meet the criteria.

The number of schools on the list is alarming.

According to Catalyst, the following high schools are eligible for turn around:

CLEMENTE
ROBESON
ROOSEVELT
CHICAGO VOCATIONAL
HOPE
WASHINGTON
GAGE PARK
PHILLIPS
SCHOOL OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
CRANE
SCHURZ
SENN
TILDEN
HYDE PARK
HARLAN
SCHOOL OF LEADERSHIP
SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY
FENGER
DYETT
FOREMAN
HIRSCH
DUNBAR
NEW MILLENNIUM
CHICAGO DISCOVERY
FARRAGUT
SULLIVAN

On one hand, it is positive that the DOE is able to identify struggling schools. Regardless of where you stand on public school issues, we can all agree that some schools are struggling and are need of changes. However, the schools listed above meet Duncan's criteria solely on the basis of quantitative data. The human aspect has been taken out of the criteria. How can important decisions about schools be made without input from students, teachers, and parents?

Giving parents & students ownership over school decisions isn't happening and, until it does, the closing, opening, and turning around will continue ad nauseum.

Against the Test: 11th Grade Socratic Seminar

2010-01-06T08:44:00.001-08:00

A couple of days ago I told you about the Socratic Seminar my juniors were taking part in. It was an overwhelming success!

Students who are usually shy & reserved were outspoken and passionate on the topic of standardized testing.

Here are a few paraphrased quotables from today's class:

And, maybe the saddest quote of the day:

I'll leave you with one more quotation:

In the coming weeks, we will begin a project addressing the issues posed in Wednesday's Socratic Seminar. Stay tuned...

Against the Test: Unit Update

2010-01-05T12:30:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow, my junior students will take part in a Socratic Seminar. This is a class discussion that is completely led by the students (no teacher involvement!).

Here are the rules & directions I will be giving to the students:

Step 1:

"The Dangerous Consequences of High-Stakes Standardized Testing"

Do you agree with certain parts? Disagree? Can you make connections?

Step 2:

Ask questions. Respond to classmates. Try to come up with a common understanding or solution to the problem. It is important to understand that there is no right or wrong answers. You are being graded on what you contribute to the argument NOT whether you are "right" or "wrong."

Step 3:

There should be no talking or commotion in the outer circle at any time.

Step 4:

Step 5:

We'll see how it goes! After class, I'll give you some updates. Stay tuned...

Against the Test: Day 2

2009-12-15T10:41:00.000-08:00

Student snippets from day 2:

What is it about standardized testing that makes you the most angry?

“I am angry that people neglect your overall high school performance and just look at your ACTs. I don't feel they should do that."
“The scores are directly related to family income, the richer the student's parents are, the higher the average score. This upsets me the most because I feel like they prepare the "richer kids" more than they prepare us."

After reading FairTest's article, one student responded:

“Wow! Why isn't this published? What can we do to fix it? Who has the advantage in the situation?"

Finally, the students are starting to think about how they can act on their ideas:

“I want to write a letter to Huberman or Duncan. I want to make sure I let someone know how testing shouldn't predict our future education."
“I am going to create a petition against the test and obtain as many signatures as possible."
“I want to write a letter to Ron Huberman. We should get straight to it about the test we take."
“I want to write a letter to Arne Duncan because I want to explain how I feel that colleges looking at low ACT scores and not report cards is unfair to students."

Unfortunately, we're going on Christmas vacation, so the students won't be starting their "Social Action" project until the beginning of January. Stay tuned...
The students have some wonderful thoughts & ideas, let's hope we can make a change!

Against the Test: Day 1

2009-12-09T09:03:00.000-08:00

I just began a mini-unit on the ill-effects of standardized testing with my junior students. The unit will include a variety of articles and lots of student lead discussion. The unit will culminate with a social action project during which students will take their ideas and turn them into action.

Students will choose one of the following Social Action Projects:

1. An editorial letter to one Chicago's major newspapers about why tests are bad
2. A letter to Ron Huberman, Arne Duncan, or any other
major educational stakeholder
3. Organizing a protest against standardized testing to help make others aware of the problem
4. Creating a petition against the test and obtaining as many signatures as possible
5. Organizing and setting up a press conference with a major Chicago news
outlet about the negative impact that tests have on learning
6. Organizing a standardized test boycott

Today was the first day of the unit. Here are some paraphrased sound bytes from my 11th graders:

"I can come to school everyday and have a great GPA but fail the ACT. That isn't fair."
"Why do the rich kids have higher scores? Is it biased towards us?
"I am a bad test taker. It isn't fair that the test counts for so much."
"The stuff on the ACT isn't even the same stuff that we learn in class."
"The ACT has nothing to do with what I want to do after college."

We will be continuing the unit on Friday. Stay tuned, there's more to come.

Any Positives to RttT?

2009-12-08T13:18:00.000-08:00

It is so easy for me to tear down the DOE's attempt at improving public education. Let's be honest, Race to the Top is a terrible name to begin with.

Where is the race? Who is running? Where is the finish line? Why are we running?

But today's article is going to be positive. If you look back at my prior posts, nothing has been positive. All negative.

So what is good about Duncan's RttT?

I was reading through Arne Duncan's November 30th interview with EdWeek and I actually found myself agreeing with some of his ideas! Most importantly, RttT is positive in that it is a multifaceted approach to school reform. Duncan and his cronies are actually looking at reform from several angles.

Most notably:
-Teacher quality
-Charters
-Turn Arounds
-Teacher incentive pay

Whether you agree with those angles and facets, is another question. Obviously, there are two sides to every issue. The BBA & EEP have polar opposite views on the above issues. However, democracy, in its finest form, is a messy thing. True and sustained reform can only be won through earnest, open-minded debate. So the more ideas that are proposed, the better chance we have of seeing true change in education.

At a time like now, with all that is at stake in public education, all voices need to be heard and all arguments need to be considered.

The "No S!&%T" moment of the Day

2009-12-08T13:07:00.000-08:00

EdWeek reports a new study finds that students who have more time on standardized tests have higher scores than those who have less time!

Race to the Status Quo

2009-12-06T17:09:00.000-08:00

Last week, EdWeek reported that the Department of Education has finalized its rules for turnaround schools. Despite negative feedback from states about the prescriptive nature of the rules, the DOE is moving forward.

"Race to the Top" is bound to fail. Here's why.

The government is set to spend $3.5 billion on the nations "worst" schools. According to the article, "To get their money, states must target schools that rank in the bottom 5 percent in student achievement." The key phrase here is student achievement. Currently, student achievement is determined by standardized test scores. Time and again, research has proven that standardized test scores are highly correlated with socio-economic status. So, in essence, 100% of the 5% of schools that will be "turned around" will be low-income schools.

Didn't we already know that low-income schools have low test scores?

The DOE has gotten it wrong again. Until "student achievement" is redefined, no successful reform will be sustained.

We already know that low-income schools have low test scores--low scores are a symptom of the problem--the problem itself is much larger. We don't need "Race to the Top" and $3.5 billion to figure it out.

Draw Your Own Conclusions

2009-12-02T08:53:00.000-08:00

So, I was perusing College Board's website and came across a report entitled "2009 State Profile Report: Illinois." The report breaks down Illinois SAT scores in a million different ways--by sex, race, SES, etc.

In table 12 of the report, critical reading scores were broken down by family income. Let's see if you can determine the pattern in the following data set:

Income:$0-$20,000
Score: 489

Income: $40,000-$60,000
Score: 553

Income: $80,000-$100,000
Score: 596

Income: $120,000-$140,000
Score: 601

Income: More than $200,000
Score: 609

What does this say about how our students are judged? Whether you staunchly oppose tests or think they are reliable, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/cbs-2009-national-TOTAL-GROUP.pdf

"Dangerous Disconnect"

2009-12-01T08:43:00.000-08:00

I recently read Catherine Gewertz's article in EdWeek about the power of expectations in low-income, urban high schools. As an urban high school teacher, the findings do not surprise me in the least--yet they still keep me awake at night.

In the article, Gewertz refers to a 2009 survey that asked teachers of low-income, urban students, their parents, and the students themselves the same question: What is the main aim of high school?

42% of students & 48% of parents said to prepare students for college. Only 9% of teachers said the same.

Why the disparity?

Some difference is natural; teachers see students everyday and are mainly focused on the journey---critical thinking skills, read & writing skills---and not necessarily the destination. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that affluent school districts would also have a teacher/parent disparity.

With that being said, 48% & 9% is a drastic disparity.

Why such a drastic disparity?

In order to truly understand the dynamics & realities of a low-income, urban classroom, one must experience them first-hand. When one does, it becomes clear that, for many urban students, basic human needs are not being met on a regular basis.

I hate to get all psychological, but take a look at Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs .

If basic needs such as food, shelter, and safety are not being met--the classroom environment is affected. Only when all of those basic human needs are taken care of, can teachers truly focus on having high academic expectations for all students. However, when they are not met, urban teachers are to play two very challenging roles at once: nurturer and teacher with high academic expectations. To play these two roles concurrently is no easy task.

It is easy to place blame on teachers, students, and parents. Don't get me wrong, all stakeholders have responsibilities and must do their part---but when a child's most basic human needs are not being met, we must look outside of school walls and at the social conditions in our cities.

In order to improve education, we must be multifaceted in our approach to reform. It is clear that focusing all of our attention on what happens inside of schools is not enough. Educational reform must also take place outside of school walls.

Shouldn't a well-fed, clothed, sheltered, healthy, safe, and cared for student have no problem making the honor roll?

Here Comes the 'Charter' Movement

2009-11-30T10:52:00.000-08:00

If you haven't read John Merrow's article about the charter movement on EdWeek, I recommend it--especially for those who are unfamiliar with what's going on in public education.

I remember Mike Klonsky telling me the story of how charter schools began in CPS. He said, originally, teachers opened charters because they believed that a school environment with fewer rules and regulations, would be better for their students. In Merrow's EdWeek article, he corroborates Klonsky's story: "The concept of a charter—a renewable license to innovate, free of most school district rules—was built on a simple idea: educators would be free to carry out their dream, but would be held responsible for results." In other words, charters were created because teachers wanted more creative control over their practice--and believed it would benefit students. Unfortunately, this definition applied to the charter schools of the late 80's & early 90's.

Today's definition of charter is decidedly different.

Today, for-profit & non-profit organizations are opening charter schools left & right. Cookie-cutters like KIPP schools, for example, are popping up like Starbucks. Instead of being focused solely on teaching and learning, charter schools are now fueled by political and monetary gain. Arne Duncan is pushing hard for more charters. $4.35 billion has been put aside to reward states that join the charter movement. States that refuse will lose stimulus dollars.

All of this without any solid research proving charter schools are any better than regular, neighborhood schools. In fact, some research even indicates that charters are worse.

So why, in an educational era where everything is driven by data, are we ignoring the mixed reviews on charter schools?

Duncan Still Thinking Inside the Box

2009-11-24T17:53:00.000-08:00

Last summer, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan outlined his four ways to turn around low-performing schools.

Here they are:

1: The new principal and teachers recruit new teachers in the spring. The previous teachers must reapply for their jobs, but most don’t get rehired.

2: The school’s leadership and staff are replaced, and the school is handed over to a charter-management organization or for-profit education management organization.

3: Most of the school’s staff members remain, but major steps are taken to revamp school culture.

4: The school is closed, and students are enrolled in "better" schools.

I am not so naive as to deny the fact that some schools are failing. Sometimes the best thing for schools with low-attendance, high drop-out rates, high teacher attrition (notice how I didn't say anything about test scores) is to be closed and reopened with a new mission & vision and strong community support. However, I believe only a small fraction of our schools meet this criteria.

Opening, closing, or turning-around schools is just treating a symptom of a much larger problem. The fact is, until a fundamental shift is made in how educational stakeholders define achievement, we will continue to “fail” our urban, low-income public school children.

It is my belief that the talent needed to reform our public schools is already in place. Parents and teachers already know what is best for their students—it is the current system that is holding them back. Removing the top-down model would simply unleash the potential of teachers and parents.

Ufortunately, Duncan's plan continues to utilize the top-down model of school reform.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education

Dropping the Test.

2009-11-23T19:40:00.001-08:00

Alfie Kohn has long been the spokesperson for getting rid of standardized tests (read this article and you'll agree). Standardized tests hurt our kids; especially low-income, urban kids. While departments of education at American colleges and universities teach progressive education methods & theory--our public schools are judged solely upon test scores. Not only do test scores paint a one-dimensional, unreliable picture of our children, but they are highly correlated with SES: the more money the kid's family has, the higher the test score--kids that come from low-income families, on average, score much lower.

Quite frankly, this ain't fair.

The good news is, it looks as though the tide is beginning to turn. I was pretty happy to read Fairtest's latest article. The article reports that about 830 American colleges and universities have dropped ACT/SAT requirements. Instead of relying on standardized test scores, colleges are starting to look at more holistic snapshots of their applicants. This is great news. Not only does it prove that the hard work of people like Kohn & Deborah Meier is paying off, but it also gives hope to countless high school students--kids who may not have "high" scores. At these 830 colleges, things like effort, interests, and high school GPA now determine admission.

This is a small victory.

The fact is, when you hear a lie over & over, you begin to believe it is true. When our students hear in 4th grade they aren't smart because they have low test scores--then hear the same thing in 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, & 11th grades--it is easy to see why many urban schools are plagued with low expectations. These tests are hurting our children.

It is pleasing to see that 830 colleges have opened their eyes to the truth--now if only Mr. Duncan & Mr. Huberman did the same.

Fox News Unveils "Teacher Absence-O-Meter"

2009-11-23T10:34:00.000-08:00

Last week, a Fox News story reported that 4.3% of CPS teachers are absent on a daily basis. That is higher than the national average of 3%. Fox also unveiled a database that tracks teacher absences at individual CPS schools.

First of all, why is this a news story? Second, what was author Mark Saxenmeyer's motivation in writing such an article?

For a minute, I tried to believe that Mr. Saxenmeyer's article was meant to shine a light on the plight of the urban public school teachers. However, when I clicked on the link the database, I was welcomed with the headline: "Teachers Playing Hooky." I then realized that, in the age of accountability, the only educational stakeholders safe from scrutiny are the "higher-ups" not the people that actually matter (like teachers, parents, and students).

So, Mr. Saxenmeyer, I challenge you to dig a little deeper. The question shouldn't be Why are these CPS teachers so gosh darn lazy? but rather Are conditions so bad in our public schools that teachers have to miss all of these days? and If so, Why?

Here's a challenge to you. Choose one of the schools which your report claims experiences high teacher absences. Go sit in a classroom for a week and observe. Talk to the teachers. Talk to the students. See what an 8th period class on a Friday after lunch is like. Then write a report. I'd be interested in reading a report like this. Instead of blaming teachers for "playing hooky" such a report would actually be productive--it might help improve the situation.

Turning Around Schools the Right Way?

2009-11-18T11:01:00.000-08:00

In The Century Fund Report: “Turnaround Schools That Work: Moving Beyond Separate but Equal,” an interesting question is posed.

What is the best way to "turn around" a school?

Frankly, I oppose programs such as Ren 10 because reform is being "done" to parents, students, and teachers, and not "with" them. However, I am not so naive to think that no school needs to be turned-around. In some instances, the best hope a school has at success is to start over--but it is all about how the school starts over that makes all the difference.

In the TCF report, Richard Kahlenberg details why charter chains like KIPP can be successful with low-income students--but also explains why the KIPP model probably cannot be sustained or replicated successfully. Charter schools like KIPP rely on "self-selected motivated students & parents" who desire longer school days and weekend enrichment. As the TCF report points out, attrition rates among students & teachers are high at schools like KIPP.

High attrition = low sustainability.

Kahlenberg goes on to mention that creating magnet schools in which attendance is driven by a mix of SES, not race or ethnicity, may be more effective at raising student achievement. This makes sense to me. The highest predictor in student achievement is SES not --race or ethnicity--though it should be pointed out that SES & race are strongly correlated, especially in urban areas. So, in effect, using SES to determine magnet school enrollment would increase school diversity but not for diversity's sake.

Turning Ideas Into Action

2009-11-17T09:19:00.000-08:00

As mentioned in my last entry, organizations that transform themselves from failing to successful share one thing in common: they all are meta-reflective in their approach to reform. These organizations think deeply about what has gone wrong, create a new, well-thought mission & vision, and then turn their thoughts into action. Improving a failing business takes time. Schools are no different. And, despite what NCLB, RTTP, and Ren 10 demand of us, a positive, sustainable change to our schools cannot & will not happen over night.

The top-down management system that large, urban school districts have adopted is the first thing that needs to go. This management style is a slap in the face to parents, students, teachers, and schools. The top-down system says to the public "We do not trust that you are capable or competent enough to create good schools so we will call the shots." In doing so, ownership of schools is taken away from all the people that matter and is given to a handful of detached business people who care only about the bottom line. In order to create lasting, sustainable change, decision making power has to be given back to parents, students, teachers, and schools. Change must be organic and not orchestrated by a central office.

Here's my plan for change:
I propose that local colleges & universities become more involved in public education reform efforts. For too long have departments of education been separated from the practice of teaching and school reform. As Dewey said in Schools & Society: "We want an even more intimate union here, so that the University shall put all its resources at the disposition of the elementary school, contributing to the evaluation of valuable subject matter-matter and the right method, while the school in turn will be a laboratory in which the student of education sees theories and ideas demonstrated, tested, criticized, enforced, and the evolution of new truths.” Theory & practice at the university level have been separated for too long.

Following me?

Further, instead of having "areas" of schools, which amount to pockets of schools geographically related, as in CPS, about 10 CPS schools would partner with a single university. This would then become its own mini-district, still a part of CPS. Decisions at these schools would be made directly by parents, students, and teachers and the process would be faciltated by the sponsoring university. Students of education at the sponsoring university would perform their clinical training at the partner CPS school.

This type of reform is not too far-fetched. It gets rid of the top-down management approach and gives power back to the real stakeholders. The reform also gets the university involved in reform efforts.

Maybe it is too good to be true.

Public Education as a Failing Business

2009-11-16T08:47:00.001-08:00

In the age of accountability, our public school systems have turned into an industry. Our schools have become business. The title "superintedendent" has been replaced by "CEO" in many of America's large urban school districts. And if our schools have become companies, then it is our children who have become products. With all this said, I do believe that educational leaders are trying to improve education. However, we are failing miserably.

If America's public education system was really an industry, it would soon be going out of business. In the business world, struggling companies do one of two things: they either adapt to their surroundings and change the way they do business or they cease to exist. Businesses that adapt to their surroundings and become successful are meta-reflective; they come together & reflect, figure out what isn't working, and spend time and effort making it work. They redefine who they are and what they do. Conversely, a failing business refuses to accept its own current reality and is too stubborn to change.

Plain and simple, this is why public education is failing. Major stakeholders are refusing to accept the current reality. If we as stakeholders cannot be honest about where we are, there is no way we'll get to where we want to go.

Solving Word Poverty

2009-11-13T10:17:00.000-08:00

Students from low-income families begin their school careers with a vocabulary that is half as extensive as their middle & upper class counterparts. Obviously, there are exceptions to this rule; there are plenty of students from lower SES households who have vast vocabularies and excel in reading and writing classes just as there are plenty of middle & upper class kids who struggle with the same material. The point is that, on average, SES is the best predictor of vocabulary. This is a fact. Look it up. And it isn't a specific problem to America

So why is this such an issue? An article in the London Telegraph sums it up nicely. In Orwell's 1984, the citizens were denied vocabulary. Why? Having a vast vocabulary allows one to put words with feelings. With strong feelings, come strong actions. By taking away vocabulary, the citizens in 1984 became powerless.

The term word poverty is not new. However, despite "reform" efforts, educational stakeholders cannot seem to solve this problem. Educational reform groups such as the EEP & BBA see the issue in extremes. The EEP is likely to think that word poverty is the school's fault; teachers need to be held accountable for better vocabulary intstruction. The BBA would blame social conditions; low-income kids have less access to books and vocabulary enrichment activities. Like most solutions, the answer usually lies somewhere in the middle. So in this case, what is the middle? And how do we as educators get to the bottom of it?

This Alphabet Soup Tastes the Same: RTTP, NCLB, Ren 10.

2009-11-12T09:07:00.000-08:00

The general pattern of RTTP, NCLB, & Ren 10 is as follows:
School districts are rewarded for achievement. Achievement is determined by test scores. Schools that "fail" the standardized test are closed down and reopened as charters.

All three of these programs are based on the same faulty logic. All three assume that higher standerdized test scores reflect higher levels of learning. This logic reflects the notion that schools are to be run as factories where students are products.

Standardized tests are so prevalent because they are easy to quantify not because they paint a true picture of individual students. In fact, painting a true picture of each individual student would be costly and timely for large, urban school districts. What if the money spent on RTTP, Ren 10, and NCLB was instead allocated to gain a more holistic view of our students? Couldn’t that money be set aside to perform more authentic assessments? A true picture of a student cannot be achieved by observing the numbers of a standardized test score. Multiple intelligences, critical thinking skills, student effort, and other skills and characteristics need to be taken into account. In short, standardized test scores should only be a fraction of what school districts look at when determining student achievement levels.

By equating high standardized test scores with higher rates of learning and intelligence, RTTP, NCLB, and Ren 10 do not affirm the life experiences, multiple intelligences, and knowledge that public school children bring with them to school every day. Instead of seeing our youth as special individuals, they are defined by a number, a test score. The fact is, until a fundamental shift is made in how educational stakeholders define achievement, we will continue to “fail” our urban, low-income public school children.

Health Care Reform Through the Eyes of Urban Students

2009-11-11T13:50:00.000-08:00

The last couple months of the health care debate has been nauseating. Unfortunately, the partisan media has painted the details of the reform in so many different shades that we as citizens don't know what to think. It is easy for anyone who has insurance to take that coverage for granted. For most of us who are covered, the easiest thing to do is stop listening to what the media is saying and distance ourselves from the issue.

At school, I see my homeroom students for 10 minutes everyday. Usually this is just enough time to greet them,take attendance, and make a few announcements. However, I'll never forget one particular day a few weeks ago when a handful of students came in all fired up about the health care issue (they were debating the issue in Civics). "Why wouldn't someone want health care that is available to everyone?" an impassioned student asked me. I looked at her and could not say much more than "I don't know."

How can one answer that question?

The school at which I teach is 95%+ low-income. Many of my students are not covered or not adequately covered with health insurance. In the age of accountability, when our public schools are judged by a single test score on a single day of school, how can we expect a student to perform if she is sick? How can we expect her to perform if her mother is sick? Dad? Sibling? How can we expect our students to perform if they cannot see well enough to read the small print on the standardized test?

So while Duncan is in DC pushing for "charter nation" and Huberman & Co. are analyzing the data to decide which school will be closed next, the CPS students who we are supposed to be serving, are hungry and sick.

So, I'll ask again: Why wouldn't someone want health care that is available to everyone?

Private Money: Thanks but No Thanks

2009-11-11T13:06:00.000-08:00

Urban school systems operate with a top down management approach, one in which reform is performed by dumping money, ideas, and/or initiatives onto teachers. This approach is based on flawed mental models and is clearly missing the big picture. What classroom teachers need the most is another set of hands, eyes, and ears in the classroom—not a lump of money which will be the source of intradepartmental competition. Private organizations like the Gates Foundation notoriously donates big money to public education in the short term. In the past, the foundations like Gates have been quick to move on to other philanthropic causes when research does not confirm that their money helped make significant statistical improvements in high-stakes achievement tests. Case in point, the Small Schools Movement in Chicago; even though the Consortium on Chicago School Research has concluded that small high schools in Chicago have higher rates of attendance, lower dropout rates, and lower rates of violence than their larger school counterparts, private funding for the Small Schools Movement has evaporated. With this in mind, one must wonder whether educational benefactors have done more harm than good to public education. By giving school districts sizeable donations and then abruptly aborting the cause, urban school districts are left high and dry and looking for a new private donors to continue operations of specific programs. Seemingly, private money is an evil that public education must get out from under. This reliance causes public school districts to focus on symptoms of the problem rather than on long term cures. Further, this funding causes instability and low morale among teachers and principals, making it difficult to take new initiatives seriously knowing that they will probably be non-existent in a few years.