Archive for June, 2011

What We’re Reading

Friday, June 24th, 2011

Must-reads, in our opinion, from this week’s education news.

Sciences, Arts, Humanities Fight for Status of Math and Reading, Curriculum Matters

With a great quote from George Lucas.

NRC Wants Science Put on Par with Math, Reading, Education Week

The National Research Council recommends that “science learning be tested as frequently and taught as rigorously as math and reading.”

Ignorance of History Permeates All Levels, Walt Gardner’s Reality Check

Just one more article about how much we don’t know about history.

Don’t Know Much About History, The Wall Street Journal

Ok, we lied: Another history article. This one’s an interview with historian David McCullough. If you read only one “must read,” make it this one.

Happy Friday.

Training Great Teachers

Friday, June 24th, 2011

We’ve written often on teacher preparation programs’ lack of emphasis on the content knowledge of future teachers. The debate over the relative importance of subject matter and pedagogical methods in teacher preparation programs has hung over the education field for well over a century. And, unfortunately, the balance has all-too-regularly shifted in favor of methods.

The gap between professors of education and their liberal arts colleagues has been called the “widest street in the world.” (Read the latest issue of AFT’s American Educator for a history of this divide.) Teacher preparation programs assume their students know and love the content they will teach. But, even in alternative certification programs, which attract exemplary candidates, content is simply not addressed.

The business world is increasingly looking for employees who are inspired by creativity and a drive to find patterns in their work and world. This kind of person is inquisitive, with deep knowledge of his/her field.

Sounds like a great teacher.

Content knowledge and pedagogical practices go hand in hand. Particularly in elementary school, as teachers help students construct foundations for learning. To teach in innovative and exciting ways, teachers must understand their subject matter deeply. To encourage their students to ask big questions ably and productively, teachers need knowledge of the answers.

There are a number of initiatives in the works to redeem teacher preparation. But, as these initiatives seek to make teacher preparation programs more selective and practical, too few of them attempt to bridge the wide, wide street between pedagogy and the liberal arts.

This is a mistake. Good teachers know and care deeply about what their students should learn. Their preparation should not only focus on how to teach, but also on what to teach and why it matters.

Stephanie Porowski

 

Relax, We’ve Never Known Our History

Tuesday, June 21st, 2011

Last week’s release of the Nation’s Report Card in history brought worrisome, if unsurprising, news. Unsurprising, because students have never scored well in history. From The New Yorker:

“And yet it may be that, while kids aren’t getting better, they’re not getting worse. The history of history-education evaluation is littered with voguish pedagogy, statistical funny business, ideological arm wrestling, a disproportionate emphasis on trivia, and a protocol that insures that each generation of kids looks dim to its elders. ‘We haven’t ever known our past,’ Sam Wineburg, a professor of education and history at Stanford, said last week. ‘Your kids are no stupider than their grandparents.’ He pointed out that the first large-scale proficiency study—of Texas students, in 1915-16—demonstrated that many couldn’t tell Thomas Jefferson from Jefferson Davis or 1492 from 1776. A 1943 survey of seven thousand college freshmen found that, among other things, only six per cent of them could name the original thirteen colonies. ‘Appallingly ignorant,’ the Times harrumphed, as it would again in the face of another dismal showing, in 1976. (And it’s not just Americans: an infamous 2004 survey revealed that a small percentage of Britons aged sixteen to twenty-four believed that the Spanish Armada was vanquished by Gandalf.)”

Read more, here.

What We’re Reading

Friday, June 17th, 2011

Must-reads, in our opinion, from this week’s education news.

Bridging the Widest Street in the World, AFT’s American Educator

A fascinating account of the divide (and its history) between liberal arts professors and their school of ed colleagues.

The Seuss Bigotry of Low Expectations, Fordham’s Education Gadfly

“Every student deserves high standards and every student deserves to have the opportunity to participate with his peers in discussions about complex books that cover varied and interesting topics. Those are the discussions and that is the content that is going to put them on the path to college.”

Experts Call for Early Focus on Black Boys Nonacademic Skills, Education Week

The article’s title betrays everything wrong with this approach. Schools should be “safe” places where ALL students focus on academic content and skills.

Here we go again: What’s wrong with black boys? Fordham’s “Flypaper”

Peter Meyer’s commentary on above-mentioned Education Week article might be the read of the week. In fact, we highlighted it.

Happy Friday.

 

A Curriculum for Every Social Problem?

Thursday, June 16th, 2011

You got a problem? They’ve got a curriculum to fix it. Or so says Peter Meyer, with insightful commentary on Fordham’s “Flypaper.”

“Just as you don’t stop teaching math to fix a water fountain, so you don’t stop teaching literature, history, and science because a child has an emotional problem. But that is what happens.  I heard a wonderful speech the other day by one of New York  State’s newest Regents, James O. Jackson,  an African-American, who complained that our schools have been ‘turned into social service agencies.’ And he’s right.  Every social problem gets a curriculum.  Drugs – we have anti-drug classes. Character?  Hours of character-building exercises.  Jobs?  We’ll visit employers (forget whether the kid can’t read or write).  Teen pregnancy?  Let’s hand out dolls and condoms and spend hours talking about body plumbing.  Did someone say Dickens?  Names of the fifty states?  Abraham Lincoln?  Who’s got time?

“I’m sorry, dear scholars, but African American children, like most children, would do much better later in life if school taught them how to read and write – and, hopefully, a little history and science, art and math along the way – instead of being served up what has become a steady and distracting and unhealthy diet of paternalism and fries.”

As we clean up our act in the cafeteria,  let’s bring a well-rounded diet to the classroom, too.

US History: Most Students Aren’t Proficient

Tuesday, June 14th, 2011

The NAEP results are in: And scores are flat, again. Once again, most students scored below the “proficient” level in U.S. history. Only twenty percent of fourth-graders, seventeen percent of eighth-graders, and a dismal twelve percent of twelfth-graders performed at or above proficient.

Scanning public reaction to the results, it’s clear that no one’s surprised. Our country’s lack of civic and history knowledge has been a mainstream news topic for decades.

More compelling are the why’s of low scores. As we see them:

  • State U.S. history standards overwhelmingly lack important history content. They err on the side of muddled history without important context and specifics.
  • Education schools and teacher preparation programs assume their students’ content knowledge, rather than fostering it.
  • History has been crowded out to make room for the more tested subjects. As education historian Diane Ravitch notes: “Fewer than half of the students at this grade level have had more than two hours a week devoted to social studies, which may or may not mean history. More likely, they have learned about a few iconic figures and major holidays.”

US students score lower in history than in any other subject tested by NAEP.  Perhaps it’s time we took a look at our standards and curricula?

Stephanie Porowski

What We’re Reading

Friday, June 10th, 2011

Must-reads, in our opinion, from this week’s education news.

Coalition Aims to Revise Voluntary National Arts Standards, Education Week’s “Curriculum Matters”

“Everyone” supports the arts; but policies too-often don’t. Maybe revising arts standards will give the arts a needed place in the policy conversation?

New Ed Week Report Sees High School Graduation Rates Rising, Education Week’s “Curriculum Matters”

High schools are graduating more students. But, whether they choose to pursue a two- or a four-year degree, are students ready for college?

Chicago’s B-students need remedial help, “Community College Spotlight”

At City Colleges of Chicago, “94 percent [of Chicago Public Schools graduates] test into remedial math, 81 percent into remedial English and 71 percent into remedial reading.” Maybe something was lacking in their high school courses?

Central Falls Teacher: Why I Quit, “Linking and Thinking on Education”

They were promised a chance to develop curriculum. Instead, science teachers got “pre-packaged kits.”

Happy Friday.

 

Why Do “Good” Schools Test Badly?

Wednesday, June 8th, 2011

Curious about the status of the “Reading Wars,” education reporter John Merrow recently visited a “great” school in a high-poverty neighborhood. It’s a school where first graders are succeeding—but only one in five fourth grade students reads at grade level.

Among other hypotheses, their teachers wonder (as others have found) if the fourth graders’ lack of content knowledge negatively impacts their reading comprehension. After all, as students progress to more complex texts at higher grade levels, content knowledge matters all the more. Merrow writes:

“Now they have to reach conclusions and draw inferences, and that’s much tougher.

“We looked over past tests, and, sure enough, the passages were about subjects that poor kids in the south Bronx may not be familiar with (cicadas or dragonflies were two of the subjects, for example). Answering the questions did require inferential leaps, just as we had been told.”

In first grade, basic decoding skills are enough to unpack even bizarre sentences like Merrow’s “The blue pancake went swimming in the lake and ate a frog.” But they’re not enough to answer more difficult reading comprehension questions, such as those on the 4th grade NAEP in Reading, which touch on science and social studies content (examples, here).

While fourth grade scores have risen slightly in the past fifteen years, the scores of 8th and 12th graders are stagnant. Schools like the one Merrow visited have made huge strides in teaching their youngest students essential decoding skills.  In fact, with older students’ scores so low in comparison, Merrow surmises that maybe their reading deficiencies are only in the eyes of the tests. Or the result of test-taking anxiety or a growing awareness of poverty.

The impact of poverty is inarguable. And test scores are far from perfect tools of evaluation. But here’s another possibility: Maybe schools are failing to teach important content, and, more importantly, maybe they’re failing to gift students with a thirst for it. And no amount of test prep can make up for this lack.

Stephanie Porowski

Update: Core Knowledge’s Robert Pondiscio has a similar take. It’s worth your read.

“Ready” for College, But Not College Credit

Monday, June 6th, 2011

There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether or not colleges really prepare students for jobs. According to some, in our push to make college more democratic, we’ve set large numbers of students up for failure. A lot of good work is going into holding colleges accountable for students’ abysmal graduation rates. But it’s hard not to place the blame further down the chain―in the hands of the high schools who “prepared” those students for college in the first place.

Only 24 percent of ACT-tested high school graduates were deemed college ready in all four subjects tested — English, math, reading and science. As college becomes an expectation for all students, they hurt from poor preparation. In 2007-2008 an estimated 42 percent of first-year undergraduate students in two-year colleges took at least one remedial course. (Remedial courses are non-credit bearing “courses in reading, writing or mathematics for college-level students lacking those skills necessary to perform college-level work at the level required by the institution”, according to NCES.)

New standards and planned assessments attempt to raise the bar for students. And the developers of these assessments and standards  have engaged higher education intentionally in the process. But better standards and assessments aren’t enough; many high school courses lack college-preparatory content. Honors, and even AP, courses are too-often advanced in name only, and succeeding in “college prep” courses does not guarantee real college preparation. A study by ACT found that even students taking the recommended college-prep curriculum were insufficiently prepared for college-level work. Incredibly, according to one report, most students taking remedial college courses graduated high school with GPA’s over 3.0.

A community college chancellor told the Chicago Sun-Times: “A lot of them don’t even know that they’re going to get tested. They have the high school diploma, they come in and, rightfully so, because nobody told them, they thought they were just going to go into college credit.”

Students who take remedial courses are significantly less likely to graduate college. As we advocate “college for all,” there’s a pressing need to better-align the content of our high school courses with the demands of college.

Stephanie Porowski

 

What We’re Reading

Friday, June 3rd, 2011

Must-reads, in our opinion, from this week’s education news.

A commencement address worth readingFlypaper

Why knowledge is still important in the “information age.”

Advanced Students in Federal Way, Wash. Automatically Enrolled in AP, IB and Cambridge ProgramsHuffington Post

But AP for everyone?

Duncan Argues for Fast-Tracking ESEA; Kline Says No WayEducation Week’s “Politics K-12”

This week’s token ESEA reauthorization-read.

A Step Back for Learning Languages, The New York Times

And, since it’s Friday, some sarcasm: “Do not be confused, dear citizens and students: the state still believes that it is important to learn foreign languages and culture before graduation. … Just not $700,000 important.”

Happy Friday.