By Tom

In my first of this three-part series I discussed the need to do something better in our most impoverished neighborhood schools. In the second post I described what I saw in several high-performing New York City charter schools. In this post I’m going to tackle the question of whether Washington State should allow charter schools.

This question has come up before. In fact, Washington has voted down charter schools three times so far, following high-profile campaigns which basically pitted pro-charter groups against the Washington Education Association, our state’s largest teachers’ union.

The union’s opposition to charter schools, as I understand it, boils down to this: charter schools take jobs from union members, they compete unfairly with traditional public schools, and they undermine those schools by “skimming off” the more motivated students from those schools.

Continue reading →

By Tamara

A couple of posts ago the issue of students and their families being ready for and knowing how to “do” school was raised. Working in a title school it is easy to see daily example of this lack of preparedness for school. Especially in the area of discipline. Like many title schools the discipline issue in my building has been an ongoing source of frustration for quite some time.

Our new principal has been working to tackle it with mixed results. She spoke to this in a staff meeting recently and her observations triggered an “aha moment” for me. She talked about how we as the adults expect these children to recognize the cause and effect relationship their behaviors and actions can trigger. Yet, my principal pointed out, few of our “repeat offenders” have any concept of cause and effect as it relates to their actions. At home it doesn’t matter what they do or don’t do, their needs (be they physical or emotional) continue to go unmet. It doesn’t matter if they behave/don’t behave, someone is going to continue to hit or hurt them. So when they get to school, she pointed out, our asking them to see their behavior and its consequences in the light of cause and effect has no meaning. So her approach whenever possible has been to use her time with that child to discuss recognizing cause and effect as a skill to manage their behavior and then send them back to class in order to practice that skill. My principal acknowledged that sending students back to class is often not what the teacher wants or needs. But she made a strong case by pointing out that these children need a place and opportunity to practice behavior management skills that they will not get at home. Like it or not, reality dictates we are that place.

After listening to my principal explain her approach to discipline in light of her observations led me to the conclusion that we are derelict in our duty to children if we do not point out cause and effect relationships in their behaviors and allow them to practice the skill of recognizing it, just as we would be derelict if we did not teach them the skills necessary for reading or computation. Is it time consuming? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. But until we can help them learn to manage themselves, neither they or the other children in class are going to learn academic skills or how to “do” life.

By Tom

Emerging from the subway tunnel in Harlem, I had two questions in my mind:

1. Were charter schools really as good as the hype, and if so, why?

2. Could they work in Washington?

I’ll address the first question in this post. I’ll discuss the next a little later this week.

Some background: I was invited earlier this month by the League of Education Voters to join a fact-finding tour of several charter schools in Harlem and The Bronx. Our goal was to learn about successful charter schools in order to inform the conversation about whether or not to allow them in Washington State.

After our breakfast at the New York City Charter School Center, a resource that helps start and sustain charter schools in New York City, we were toured Harlem Success Academy and Kappa International High School (not actually a charter school; more of a high-expectation “choice school”) On the following day we saw KIPP Charter School and Green Dot charter school.

Although I’ve never been a big fan of charter schools, I was determined to keep an open mind and see for myself what these places were all about. I had even done my homework: I read Diane Ravitch’s The Death and Life of the Great American School System as well as Steven Brill’s Class Warfare. (He loves charter schools; she doesn’t.)

Continue reading →

By Tamara

In our district every week we have a late start day so that teachers and administration can participate in collaboration. Some weeks it’s by grade level, some by content area, and some, as whole staff. Quick disclaimer: as a whole I think my district has one of the more progressive and supportive approaches to collaboration in the state.  Recently as a whole staff we spent an hour essentially being told we didn’t really know how to teach. And here are some strategies to fix that. Keep in mind we have nine National Board Certified teachers on our staff. Nonetheless, our instructional coaches, principal, and area director, loaded us up with strategies and formative assessments (because, it was implied, we aren’t developing or making use of those) they used when they were in the classroom that would improve our student’s learning.

Now every one of the strategies presented were good and worthwhile in their own right. The issue was the tone in which they were presented: if you just did these things (because the strategies you are currently using are not increasing MAP/MSP scores sufficiently) students would be learning. No acknowledgement of what teachers are currently doing that is working, no celebration of success.

While the message to a seasoned staff that we have a lot to learn about how to teach is troubling enough, what really bothers me is the attitude that district leadership has about its teachers in light of the new teacher/principal evaluation system coming down the pike 

Both Mark and I have touched on the need for professional development of evaluators in our recent posts about the new teacher/principal evaluation system. I have been optimistic that administrators and teachers would approach this coming change by assuming positive intent from all parties. What I heard recently left me disheartened and worried. If my district is currently working on an assumption of deficit model, the transition to a growth continuum model (even with heavy PD) will be rocky at best, if possible at all.  

By Tom

Eighty-eight percent. That's the proportion of freshmen at a large, urban university who had to take remedial courses in math or English before they could start on their regular college-level classes.

In other words, 88% of these college students were not “college ready.”

I learned about this state of affairs at a recent NCATE accreditation visit. I can’t name the specific school (or else NCATE would fire me from a job for which I’m not even paid) but it doesn’t really matter. This is typical in colleges that serve urban, high-needs populations. Their students routinely come from high school with something less than a high school education.

We can take some comfort in the fact that these students probably aren’t the best of the bunch. This was, after all, a second-tier state school. The best high school students in the area presumably went to private colleges or more prestigious public universities. And you’ll also be pleased to know that two years ago, ninety-four percent of the freshmen needed remedial classes. Progress! On the other hand, these are the students who are going to college. Reread that last sentence and think about it for a minute.

No matter where you stand on education reform, you can’t pretend this isn’t a problem. And you have to ask yourself two questions.

Continue reading →

By Kristin

This is what I'm talking about.  These excellent people, quaintly called "millionaires" in the Seattle Times article, as if a million will even buy you a house with a garage in some Seattle neighborhoods, these people who went to Olympia and heroically encouraged legislators to ask the rich to pay more in taxes.

The response from one conservative lobbyist?  "If you want to pay more, just write a check to the federal government."  I wonder what the millionaires thought about that.  Maybe something along the lines of, "Really?  How can you even find the brain cells to spare when tying your shoes in the morning?"  

Continue reading →

By Rob

It is easy to criticize Washington’s commitment to education as illustrated by the budget cuts over the past few years. One idea that was recently floated was eliminating state funding for busing. Eliminating this funding will save approximately $220 million.

Washington State’s funding covers two-thirds of the cost to bus students to school. If eliminated local districts would have to bear the extra costs. Presumably some districts can afford this extra burden and others would require levies. However, an additional levy would be difficult to pass in many communities.

Eliminating bus routes may be necessary. This fact is alarming. First, a school bus loaded with 45 kids is an efficient way of bringing students to school. It is far more economically efficient (time and fuel) than individual cars or carpooling.

Second, how many schools are equipped to handle an increased number of students being dropped off by car? Presently the morning drop off at my school looks like an Ikea parking lot on a Saturday. We are not designed to handle the traffic we currently have.

Third, and most importantly, is safety.

“Each year approximately 800 school-aged children are killed in motor vehicle crashed during normal school travel hours. Of these 800 deaths, about 20 (2 percent) – 5 school bus passengers and 15 pedestrians – are school bus-related. The other 98 percent of the school aged deaths occur in other motor vehicles… or to pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists.” (The Relative Risks of School Travel: A National Perspective and Guidance for Local Community Risk Assessment– a study released by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences in June 2002).

On average there is one school bus fatality per 500 million vehicle miles traveled. School bus drivers are among the most professional and safety conscious individuals to serve our children. They make school buses one of the safest forms of transportation in the United States.

Every educator understands that schools must be a safe place for students. This begins at the bus stop. Cuts to education could put the futures of students at risk but cuts to transportation have the potential to put lives at risk. Let’s take this proposed cut off the table. It never should have been there in the first place.

By Tom

I just finished a week of parent-teacher conferences. And although it can be physically exhausting, it’s always one of my favorite times of the year. They always come at a time when I’m just starting to think about my class as a group of different individuals, and when I’m curious about how they got to be the way they are. As always, this year’s conferences were enlightening. It may surprise you to learn that I’m actually a pretty good listener, which is what I spend most of the conference doing. I’ll ask a few questions and go through a few pieces of student work, but mostly I listen to what parents tell me about their children. To paraphrase Yogi Berra, “You can hear a lot by just listening.”

Specifically:

-A lot of families are really struggling right now. You already knew that, and so did I, but after talking with some of them, it’s become far more real. People are unemployed, underemployed and badly-employed. I talked with a guy from Microsoft who’s been out of work for months; a former dentist from the Ukraine, who’s working at an entry-level, low-skill job; and several parents who work nights at the only jobs they can find. Most of us in education look at the current budget crises in Olympia and quickly decide that the answer is more taxes. But most of us in education don’t live nearly as close to the edge as some of the families we work with. Higher taxes might improve their children’s education, but they might also push them over that edge.

-I work with a lot of recent immigrants. Over half of my students were either born overseas or have parents that were. Many of these families come from places where child-rearing is a multi-generational endeavor. Adjusting to the American way of raising kids doesn’t always work out very well.

-Somewhat related to that, it was clear that at least one-third of my students are essentially ruling their households. Their parents seem to have lost control. For some of these families, it's partly because their children speak better English than anyone else in the house. For others, it's simply weak parenting. Either way, these are eight-year-olds, for crying out loud, and I can only imagine what the future holds. I actually had one man, with no sense of irony, ask me to tell his daughter to read on the weekends. I was about to ask him the same thing. I’m clinging to the belief that this is just a small-sample aberration; that there isn’t really a parenting crisis in this country. Please let me cling to that belief.

-My personal relationship with parent conferences has evolved. When I first started teaching, I was about ten years younger than any of the parents. I didn’t know what I was doing and I didn’t know what I was talking about. And they knew it. Then for awhile I was about the same age as the parents. I also began to know what I was talking about. Conferences became a lot more enjoyable. Now I’m about 20 years older than most of the parents. I’m roughly their parents’ age. Consequently, they treat me like a person from the previous generation. I’m still getting used to that.

-More than anything else, math confuses parents. Especially the fact that we seem to lack a consistent approach to teaching it. When third-grade math problems confuse grown-ups, something’s amiss. I’m at the point where I would agree to any math curriculum, even the worst math curriculum, as long as we stick with that curriculum for eat least thirty years. Honestly.

-One of my students, the oldest of five kids, hasn’t seen her dad since he went to Iraq nine months ago. He’s coming home in three weeks; the day before Veteran’s Day.

 Just thinking about that makes me smile and cry at the same time.

By Tamara

First, thank you Rob for inspiring the title of this post in one of your recent comments.

Last weekend I attended OSPI/CSTP’s symposium on Teacher Principal Evaluations and Common Core Standards implementation. I walked away with the overall sense that most teachers want an evaluation system that validates their efforts and provides opportunities for professional growth. There was also an overall sense of anxiety about how these new evaluations will be implemented. Who is doing the evaluating? How and when are they being trained to evaluate? Will my evaluator be knowledgeable about my content area or grade level? Or about goals and standards for special populations (hello, I teach English Language Development-I can assure you my students are not going to be meeting standard as defined by Common Core any more than they are with EALRs and Power Standards now)?

The overwhelming theme in my small group session was the need for implementation to be approached with positive intent by all involved. No wants to feel trapped in a game of “Gotcha”. At the same time the only positive thing I heard about our current evaluation model was that it doesn’t involve student data.

That is the ultimate sticking point. Everyone seems to see new teacher and principal evaluation as a positive until we get to the part about using student performance data. I agree this issue needs to be approached with caution and careful consideration. But I also think, what is the ultimate outcome of our work supposed to produce? Is it not improved student performance/learning over time? How often do we bemoan that the public does not see teaching as a bona-fide profession? All other “professionals” are evaluated to some degree or other as to how their work directly impacts achieving specific outcomes. Granted children are complex packages of multiple variables that make their growth as learners difficult to quantify. But going through the National Board Certification process opened my eyes to the fact that learning (as defined by growth demonstrated over time) is absolutely quantifiable. And because student learning is the core of what we do, we should not shy away from having that data as a part of our evaluations.

But student data can not be used as a “one shot” snap shot of teachers’ performance. And it cannot be based on a single measure (like MSP, HSPE, pick your alphabet soup high stakes test) especially if we can all agree that student learning is defined and growth demonstrated over time. We talk about portfolio assessment being a more accurate measure of student progress than individual on demand performance assessments or tests. Why not a portfolio assessment model for teachers when it comes to the student data portion of our evaluation? That would bring us far closer to the balance of accountability and flexibility I hear so many of us pining for.

By Tom

I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference between problems – which can be solved – and polarities, which can’t. A problem would be like a broken copy machine. You call the repairperson and tell them to fix it. Soon. And when they do, the problem is solved.

A polarity is different. A polarity is a situation for which there are two opposite approaches, or “poles.” Each pole has positive as well as negative aspects. It looks like this: (pay attention to the arrows)

An example of a polarity would be classroom management; One approach, represented by Pole 1, would be fierce accountability and rule enforcement. Pole 2 would be a more relaxed, fun approach. A teacher might start out acting really strict and quickly notice the benefits: a quiet room, a serious atmosphere, etc. This is represented by Box A. Soon, however, our teacher might notice that there are negative aspects to being ultra-strict: nobody’s having fun, nor are they really engaged in the learning. This is Box B. As a result, the teacher relaxes things a bit and the mood lightens. The kids are more engaged and the atmosphere is livelier. Now we’re in Box C. Soon, however, things get out of hand, and the classroom becomes a zoo: Box D. In response, the teacher gets all strict and rigid again and we’re back in Box A.

The best teachers aren’t the ones who find the perfect balance between strict and fun. In a polarity, balance is only an illusion. The best teachers are able to nimbly transfer from one box to another in response to the situation. They dwell mostly in Boxes A and C, reaping the rewards that are found there. As soon as they dip into B or D, they change it up and move on. The best teachers can go from Vince Lombardi to Jimmy Buffett and back again in the course of a single lesson, knowing full well that both approaches are essential to effective classroom management.

This paradigm is also useful to explain Education Reform. Specifically, teacher evaluation, which I see not as a problem – something to be fixed – but as a polarity; a situation for which there are two opposite, yet equally valuable, approaches.

The two poles of teacher evaluation are accountability and flexibility. We need both. But in order to have both, we need to engineer and sustain a system that’s nimble enough to use both. If our system seems too rigid and focused on accountability and data, we need to be able to quickly tweak it, making it more flexible. And vice-versa.

As we speak, Congress is mulling over the reauthorization of ESEA. One thing they’re mulling is teacher evaluation; specifically whether each state should have an evaluation system that uses data from student test scores. The high accountability camp – which includes most Ed-Reform groups, as well as the Obama Administration – sees this as essential to ESEA’s original purpose as a tool in the War on Poverty.

The other camp – which includes the NEA and the AFT, as well as conservative politicians – doesn’t. They would like to leave the specifics of any teacher evaluation system up to individual states. Anyone who sees teacher evaluation as a polarity would have to agree. Personally, I have questions about the validity, reliability and fairness of using student data to evaluate teachers. But even if I didn’t – even if I loved the idea – I would still want a system that had the capacity to make large or small changes as the need arose.

Federal laws do not have that capacity. Take NCLB. (please) That law started out looking sweet. We were identifying low-performing schools left and right and doing something about it. Test scores were rising. We were solidly in Box A. Then we started seeing the negative effects: decent schools being mislabeled, hyper-focus on tested subjects, test-prep at the expense of real teaching; and we knew we needed to recalibrate.

But we can't. We're in Box B with no way of getting to Box C. The Federal Government is many wonderful things, but it is not nimble. It was actually designed to not be nimble. When a system literally needs an Act of Congress to tweak itself, it is not nimble.

Teacher evaluation is something that will never be solved or figured out. There will always be a push and pull between those who favor more accountability and those who want more flexibility. That’s as it should be. A healthy system respects a polarity and has the capacity to change, nimbly harnessing the best of each pole.

A well-run district would have that capacity. A well-led state might. The Federal Government?

Not a chance.