Archive for January, 2011

Forgetting Homer Plessy

Monday, January 31st, 2011

In Plessy v. Ferguson, the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment

  1. supported segregation
  2. protected the rights of slave owners
  3. guaranteed the right to an attorney
  4. upheld freedom of expression

This question* comes directly from Maryland’s American government exam, a graduation requirement ensuring that students learn about segregation and the Civil Rights movement, about political systems, geography, and human interdependence, for starters.

But Maryland is poised to cut this assessment. A blow to learning from the governor of a state with Ed Week’s #1 education ranking.

When Maryland adopted this requirement (along with a biology test) three years ago, the state endowed subjects beyond NCLB-tested math and reading with a guaranteed place in high school curricula … and with all-important funding.

So Baltimore schools’ head rightly asks: “[W]hat does it signal, that government is suddenly less relevant than the other subjects? Why government and not the other tests?” We’d like to hear Governor O’Malley’s answer.

Although Maryland does hope to join with other states to develop a common social studies assessment, the state wouldn’t assess the subject again until at least 2015. We wonder—what happens to social studies in the four + year void? Could government and history courses be the new arts and foreign language programming—branded disposable in state budgets, and, consequently, by education officials?

Shame on Maryland and its governor for cutting Government from its budget. Let’s hope other states choose to support deep learning—teaching their students the history of “separate but equal,” its legacy, and its overturning.

*Answer 1 is the correct choice.

Stephanie Porowski and Meagan Estep

Posted in Assessment, History/Social Studies | 1 Comment »

Page 50 of the Nation’s Report Card

Wednesday, January 26th, 2011

Buried deep in the report on the 2009 NAEP science assessment is what is likely the key to raising science achievement (and achievement in other subjects, for that matter). Past scores of data on race/ethnicity, state/jurisdiction, parental education, gender, school location and the rest, is a chart—figure 46—that shows how much simply taking more science courses improves student performance:

What they mean by “coursetaking category” is that they broke down 12th grade student performance according to how many (and what type of) science courses students took. The bottom bar on the chart indicates the performance of students who took just one science course in high school (either biology or another science course, most likely earth science). The middle bar shows the performance of students who took biology and chemistry. And the top bar illustrates the performance of students who took biology, chemistry, and physics.

The difference in performance is significant. Students who took both biology and chemistry scored 15 points higher than those who just took biology or any other single science course, and those who took physics in addition to biology and chemistry scored 33 points higher than single science course-takers.  A quick analysis shows (see our math and chart below) that this amounts, approximately, to an 11% improvement for each additional science course taken.  So students who took three science courses scored 22% higher than those who took just one.

The great disappointment—and the key reason, NAEP’s data suggests, for poor overall student performance on the science assessment—is that so few students are taking enough science classes. Just one-third of 12th graders who took the NAEP had taken biology, chemistry, and physics.  Thirty-eight percent had taken two courses and 28% just one.

So why doesn’t this finding—that taking more science vastly improves student performance on the NAEP—driving the discussion of the science NAEP scores? The course-taking data is relegated to the 9th paragraph (of 12) of the National Assessment Governing Board’s press release and page 50 of its 79-page report. And NAGB didn’t even bother computing the percentage gains associated with taking additional science courses.  As far as we can find, no one who has written about this report thus far has even mentioned the course-taking data.

For decades, our discussion about student performance has revolved around data points (race, location, etc. as listed above) that are irrelevant to what actually improves student achievement:  increasing student knowledge. It is time to put the content of education at the center of the reform discussion. The longer content, course-taking, and curriculum remain on the sidelines, the further our students and our nation will fall behind.

Lynne Munson

Click here for more Common Core commentary on NAEP.

Posted in Assessment, Math and Science | 5 Comments »

History, a Subject Only a Teacher Could Love

Friday, January 21st, 2011

A recent CNN article highlights the struggles of social studies teachers dealing with convoluted expectations and insufficient classtime.

“In the 1860’s, the United States was caught up in the Civil War. The 1960’s are remembered for social revolution, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and Beatlemania.

But high school teacher Davide Plonski notices that some students have a weak sense of time, are unable to picture the different characteristic of these eras and often confuse events a century apart.”

Teachers blame a slew of factors – less time spent on social studies at the elementary level, technological distractions, and lack of required history testing under NCLB. Whatever the case, teachers see a startling lack of historical literacy among their students, who can point to a Declaration of Independence but don’t recognize its significance.

“In a lot of districts, social studies and science have been removed from the curriculum, per se, because of math and language arts testing,” says a Wyoming elementary school teacher.

It’s encouraging to see teachers work to counteract this trend: Elementary teachers use social studies texts as “informational texts,” fitting them into their language arts curricula. High school teachers sift through the disjointed details required by their standards to help their students see history in context.

Once again, teachers have it right. But, I wonder, is their battle winnable? Are they fighting an impossible fight against an increasingly basic-skills-obsessed education system?

Stephanie Porowski

Posted in History/Social Studies, Teacher Perspective | 3 Comments »

Lowering the Bar in Wyoming

Wednesday, January 19th, 2011

With an eye to keeping its best and brightest students in the state, Wyoming offers top high school students Hathaway Merit Scholarships. To be eligible for any of four levels of the scholarship, students must take a foreign language, among other requirements.

But the Wyoming Senate is poised to lower requirements for the scholarship. On Monday, House Bill 13, which would modify Hathaway’s requirements so that high school students could take fine and performing arts or vocational classes in place of a foreign language, passed a vote in the House.

With so many of its students struggling in college, the state should think twice before lowering the rigor of the scholarship. Wyoming (like most other states) already posts abysmal college retention and graduation rates: Only 77 percent of students at four year—and 65 percent at two-year—colleges return their sophomore years. While only 57 percent go on to earn a degree. Nearly seventeen percent of the lowest and—and ten percent of the middle—tiers of Hathaway recipients lose their scholarships because of poor academic performance.

Yet HB 13 has broad, if misguided, support in both parties, as well as in the arts community. A supporter of the bill says, “It puts all these core areas on equal footing.”

Maybe so. But it relegates all of these subjects to optional status. To better prepare scholarship recipients for the academic rigors of college, and to establish art and foreign language as “core areas” of a liberal arts curriculum, Wyoming should require both subjects. And do away with skills-obsessed and content-lite vocational ed options.

Update: Yesterday the Senate approved the bill by voice vote. It comes up for a second reading today. Stay tuned.

Stephanie Porowski and Lynne Munson


Posted in Arts, Foreign Language | No Comments »

Education Goes Corporate

Tuesday, January 11th, 2011

For a wonderfully satirical take on the 21st century skills agenda, watch this video.

The make-it-yourself animated film short features a teacher decked out in a uniform and corporate badge and a corporate education guy (complete with a headset) at Compucon College Preparatory Academy.

It promises to entertain if you have ever wondered …

  1. “If all these super rich technology corporations are just using their donations to push policies that will create more demand for technology in the classroom.”
  2. Why teachers aren’t more involved in education decisions.
  3. About “claims of evidence-based research.”
  4. And finally, “[w]hat is this 21st century learning” anyway?

The video’s answers make for a laugh but are jarringly close to reality as policymakers push for schools to be more like corporations and drive education reform with iPad purchases. I couldn’t help but cringe as corporate education guy said, “decisions about education are best made by politicians and those with the money to influence them.”

Stephanie Porowski

Posted in 21st Century Skills | 1 Comment »

Rhee and Black, Both Wrong

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011

Michelle Rhee and Cathie Black appear to have little in common. Rhee has spent her career in K-12 education, while Black is a newcomer imported from business. But their ideas about education share at least one striking and disturbing commonality, exhibited just within the last week: A lack of appreciation, nay even an aversion, for curricula. When asked by Core Knowledge’s Robert Pondiscio what role curriculum would have in her new advocacy venture, former DC schools head Rhee said, in a word, none. “The last thing we’re going to do,” she said, “is get wrapped up in curriculum battles.”

And, in her introductory missive to employees of the New York City school system which she new heads, Black gushed over 21st century skills, asserting that teaching such skills is the chief goal of K-12 education. Topping Black’s list of work she wants to get done: “[R]ethink[ing] the standard model of a classroom so we can teach 21st Century skills in innovative and engaging ways.” 21st century skills is not a curriculum. It is a fad.

Neither of these women speaks about ensuring that all of America’s schoolchildren are taught history or literature or the arts or foreign languages. Without that kind of knowledge, not only will kids’ dreams be limited by their scant understanding of the world, but they will be unable to move beyond basic reading skills.

Rhee’s and Black’s plans both lack the essential ingredient: A concern with curriculum quality. And they will leave too many children behind.

Lynne Munson

Posted in 21st Century Skills, Curriculum | 6 Comments »

Watering Down AP

Tuesday, January 4th, 2011

Buried in an Ed Week article on online AP courses — more 21st-century skills talk.

“[C]ourse requirements are being retooled to include more-robust content, but with a focus on the development of 21st-century skills,” says the executive director of curriculum and content development at College Board.

This isn’t the first indicator that AP has fallen prey to the Partnership for 21st Century Skills’ slick presentation. In fact, the College Board Standards for College Success highlight 21st century skills. There is no call for students to develop deep content knowledge. Rather, students should “reflect 21st-century skills such as problem solving, critical and creative thinking, collaboration, and media and technological literacy.”

We’ve criticized College Board for turning from content. And we’re not the only ones who have noticed.

Focusing on skills rather than learning. AP is still a “mile wide and an inch deep,” and College Board missteps again.

Stephanie Porowski

Posted in 21st Century Skills, Curriculum | 1 Comment »