by Stories from School's FIRST guest blogger: John
The nationally syndicated article by E. J. Dionne on education that appeared in this past Sunday’s Seattle Times is relevant to Tom’s last post on what new approach the Obama administration will take on education policy.
In addition to the policy statement Tom mentioned (EPI), Dionne also mentions a second policy onto which new Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has signed—the Education Equality Project. It’s Statement of Policies includes this: “The sad reality is that these systems are not broken. Rather, they are doing what we have designed them to do over time. The systems were not designed with the goal of student learning first and foremost, so they are ill-equipped to accomplish what is demanded of them today.”
Schools were not built to overcome achievement gaps—they were designed to manage and rank all kids and educate some kids. While this may seem depressing, I believe it offers some hope…
If we can change the way schools do business, we can begin closing the achievement gap without spending trillions to do it. The key is in Dionne’s article title and final line—collaboration.
To continue the car analogy, what if you took your car instead to a team of mechanics? Instead of one mechanic’s opinion that you need a part that will cost and arm and two legs, you get a second mechanic who pipes in that he knows a wholesaler who can get the part for half that price. And then a third mechanic says “I can do you one better—I know a guy who refurbishes those parts for a quarter of the price.”
Once schools start building a culture of collaboration, of collective responsibility for all students, not just those assigned to them, unprecedented gains can be made. The National Staff Development Council (NSDC) notes that “organized learning groups (of teachers) provide the social interaction that often deepens learning and the interpersonal support and synergy necessary for creatively solving the complex problems of teaching and learning.” (2007)
A school is built with a system of interventions that takes collective responsibility for not allowing students to fail can begin to overcome the factors outside of the school setting that provide barriers to learning. We did exit interviews with high school students in my district and several mentioned the fact that knowing they would not be allowed to fail was one of their strongest motivating factors. Often there is nobody else in the student’s life that cares enough to provide those expectations.
In some ways this approach makes the job much more difficult—it requires almost an “IEP” approach to each student. On the other hand, working together is almost always easier than working in isolation. Take a look at Damen’s comment to Tom’s post. He says, “I should just guide them and let them excel on their own. Then there are those who will struggle to achieve no matter how many hours I put in lesson planning. To reach these students I need to teach there parents how to parent or take the kid to a museum myself.” Damen’s language indicates that he sees the challenge completely on his shoulders. When looking at the challenge of overcoming the outside factors that hinder learning, it is overwhelming to do it alone. With a team approach, there is hope.
Obama and Duncan have teamed up on the basketball court with much success. I hope they focus on what has been shown to work and fight for the resources needed to implement true teamwork in schools.
John certified as a National Board Certified Teacher in 2002 in the Early Adolescence English Language Arts certificate area. He currently serves as a district professional development director.
To continue the car analogy even further, what if you took your car instead to a different team of mechanics for a second opinion? They could stand around and talk over coffee and the one who knew what he was talking about could be overruled by the other two who had more seniority. The IEP specialist and the Director of Special Ed could then quarrel about exactly what services the school can afford while the parent steams and demands more tests. Finally, the case manager opens her laptop with the IEP template and actually writes the plan.
You wind up paying twice your original estimate and fail to help the problem. In fact, you spend even more money attempting to diagnose the problem because the first set of WISC-R results and Woodcock-Johnsons didn’t jibe with what the teachers were telling the EST team in the first four meetings. So, now the teacher needs to fill out the 120 true/ false/ maybe questions that ask about everything under the sun and really don’t specify much of anything. “Student has been sexually abused at home. Y/N/M” — as if the teacher knew but was holding that information until you gave him the green form to fill out. What’s with those green forms anyway? “Due no later than tomorrow, please fill out the kids name and address and his grades in every class and answer these simple questions.”
It would be lovely if these meetings were effective. It would be even better if effective meetings could lead to a solution, but they don’t. In my experience, the final result of all those meetings and all of that paperwork and those consultancy fees is that the teachers are told to make some accommodations and changes that have already been in place since the third week of school.
More importantly, children are not cars. Their problems aren’t solved by plugging in a new set of spark plugs and replacing the oil. Teachers don’t bid their ideas to the team in some capitalistic fashion. Children do not fail in one part that can be replaced by a magical pseudo-competitive free market multi-teacher consortium that has the best interests of the system at heart.
Teachers, parents, staff, and the kid all have ulterior motives and none of these lives up to your fantasy of mechanic #3 underbidding at a quarter of the price.
Although, I must admit that I’d love to start a bidding war in one of those meetings just to liven it up some.
“I can give him extra time and I’ll do 15 minutes a day after school.”
“Well, I’ll give him that and organize learning groups of teachers to provide the social interaction that deepens learning and the interpersonal support and synergy necessary for creatively solving the complex problems of teaching and learning.”
“Damn. Outbid again.”
First, I hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and is enjoying the holiday season.
Second, a few thoughts on the feedback, which I appreciate.
Tom wrote: “I completely agree with the call to collaborate. Except I’d like see it run a little deeper. I’d like to see entire communities take responsibility for education.”
I couldn’t agree more, and apparently so do Obama and Duncan. One of the best models of this that I’m aware of is the Harlem Children’s Zone, made famous by a book making it onto a lot of Best of ’08 book lists, Whatever It Takes by Paul Tough, chronicling the work of Geoffrey Canada. From Obama’s website: “And that’s why when I’m President, the first part of my plan to combat urban poverty will be to replicate the Harlem Children’s Zone in twenty cities across the country.” If you aren’t familiar with this project please check it out.
http://www.edutopia.org/paul-tough-harlem-childrens-zone
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/07/18/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam_19.php
But while we are working on these comprehensive programs, schools can create the type of collaborative culture that I described, with everything from the master schedule to reporting/grading practices to required team-created common assessments. While I agree, Travis, that we have made strides in the past generation in education, we are not as far as we could be based on what we know works in schools. I believe secondary schools especially need to look at changing practice, where the culture of autonomy is generally more entrenched.
Don’t get me wrong—-as a district administrator I’ve been able to get into classrooms all over my district, from kindergarten to graphic design, and I’ve seen amazing teachers at work. I’ve also seen teachers on the other end of the spectrum. I think I have enough contact with colleagues to conclude that my district is not the only one with this variance. Marzano (2003) and his team concluded that the biggest system-level factor for improving student achievement is a “guaranteed and viable curriculum,” but too often school is still a lottery—and as a parent with kids just reaching school age, this is really hitting home with me.
There are secondary schools getting this done. Pioneer Middle School in Tustin, CA has been a “mentor” school for my district.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/tustin/article_2169681.php
Pioneer has been collaborating with us, as we at the district level have tried to practice what we are preaching. I think Rick Dufour (2003) puts it much better than I could:
“It is time for school leaders to stop making excuses for their failure to implement what we know about improving schools. Superintendents are not justified in giving schools the autonomy to continue bad practice in the name of site-based management. Principals are not justified in allowing teachers to work in isolation in the guise of teacher empowerment. Teachers are not justified in going it alone under the pretext of academic freedom. Either we are a profession, or we are not.”
Interesting post, John. Clearly stated.
I’m curious. What measurable individual student behavior patterns do you want “collaboration” to yield? What risks do you think these patterns will yield for students as alumni? (Yes, that’s linear thinking, as it is when I negotiate contracts and repair my cars or select someone to do what I don’t want to do.)
@John, loved the post. I have a morsel first, just to get them done with and then some meat. Damen’s tone was humorous (sarcastic but not in a rude way), pointing out the flaw in the current system or the ultimate possibility of where the system will fail. However, this in no way detracts from your post. I only mention it in case future readers wish to discuss that interplay between your post and that comment.
I found the part, “The sad reality is that these systems are not broken. Rather, they are doing what we have designed them to do over time . . . . Schools were not built to overcome achievement gaps—they were designed to manage and rank all kids and educate some kids.” This is the school system from which my grandparents, even my parents came. So from that perspective, within less than one generation, the achievement that has been made thus far in improving our schools; improving the teacher preparation; and improving the way students do learning is huge. I see this as a statement of fact. A statement of success. One on which we can all build. It does make the future a bit more rosy if we acknowledge the distance covered so far.
I also like the finger you point to collaboration and the mention of a psuedo-IEP for all students if totally doable, doable if teachers collaborate, team, and think as a group. I.E.P. — Individualize Education Program. Really, this could mean giving the individual student the individual education that he/she needs and have it planned out to reach those individual goals. As a SPED teacher of not too long ago, this make perfect sense to me and resonates greatly with how I teach my class. And yes, it does take more work. However, the academic gains of the students can be seen both in class discussions, grades, and (wait for it….) WASL. I would go so far as to saw statistically significant results when students are given individual education. Luckily, I had a fantastic science and math teacher with whom I planned and thought out ideas and even though we did not team that much, we were solid on a similar approach to learning and students moved seamlessly from one room to the other, mine being the English class. (Yes, I know…science, math, and English. Well, those linear-concrete thinkers and I work well together.)
We need more teacher leaders, teachers taking lead. NBPTS is one step in making that happen (my local newspaper, The Columbian, just did an opinion piece on that http://www.columbian.com/article/20081222/OPINION02/712229942
And to Tom, yep, that background knowledge the student has colors what the student gets out of the lesson or course of study. In my case, some of my more language savvy students got, and could build on, my more arcane or off-kilter jokes-puns-ironies. This is because they brought a wealth of word manipulation with them from a house stocked with books and parents who read to them. However, by the end of the year, everyone understood and could get the jokes, and build on them. I cannot say whether they thought my jokes were funny, but they got it. Sometime part of teaching the lesson today is making sure to continue if all year, constantly cycling through, assessing, goal building, teaching, assessing until the student gets the skill.
Thanks John for the guest post. I hope to hear from you again.
Great post, John; and welcome to the blog. I completely agree with the call to collaborate. Except I’d like see it run a little deeper. I’d like to see entire communities take responsibility for education. Starting with prenatal health care, and continuing with social services, cultural centers, YMCAs, etc. A lot of those pieces are already in place, but there’s not a lot of communication and “collective responsibility” going on between the pieces. Schools, no matter how collaborative, can’t do it all. In fact, some of our best work only widens the achievement gap. Here’s an example: As part of a unit on the science of sound, I took my third graders to an interactive museum in which they got to play different musical instruments, applying their classroom learning to figure out how to change the pitch. The kids with a rich background in music and interactive museums in general got a lot more out of the experience than the kids for whom this had been their first time holding a real instrument. All of us know that if a student already has a schema in place, each related experience builds onto it. That’s why we organize learning into units. That’s why Anna was holding a flute and comparing it to her older sister’s clarinet and her father’s saxophone. She could tell me exactly how to change the pitch of a flute. Meanwhile, one of her classmates, a kid who’s grown up in horrible poverty, was holding a ukulele for the first time, thinking it was a guitar, and had no idea how to change the pitch until I showed him. Did they both belong on this field trip? Of course! Did this field trip narrow the achievement gap? Absolutely not. So what are we doing about guitar boy? Exactly what you’re telling us to do. After a long, long Child Study Team meeting, we’ve gotten him into a smaller math class with some additional one-on-one tutoring three afternoons a week. We’re having the SLP test him to see if he qualifies for an IEP, and the learning support teacher will test his literacy skills and work with me to develop a plan to improve his reading and writing. But close the gap between him and Anna? Not this year. Not unless we keep Anna in the closet for awhile so she’ll stop learning. I’m afraid that if we’re really, really serious about closing the achievement gap, we need to change a lot more than the level of communication between faculty members. Of course, if what we really want is to use the achievement gap as a political tool to undermine public support for the school system in order to advance the agenda of charter schools and vouchers, then that’s another story. And maybe another post?