Reversal of Fortune in California

October 20th, 2011

A new law in California eliminates California’s arts and foreign language high school graduation requirement by allowing students to take a career-technical education (CTE) course instead.

Sound familiar? AB 1330 is nearly identical to a bill vetoed by then-Governor Schwarzenegger last fall at the urging of Common Core, among others.  By signing AB 1330 into law, Governor Brown damages the teaching of the arts and foreign language in his state and guarantees thousands of students will graduate high school unqualified for admission to California’s public universities.

The new law continues a trend in California (and across the nation): With budgets tight, more than three-quarters of California’s school districts have reduced their art and music offerings over the past two years. One quarter of those districts have dropped the classes entirely.

The University of California and California State University systems require high school students to graduate with an education across the liberal arts, including courses in the arts and foreign language. In fact, arts and foreign-language courses are twice as likely as CTE classes to be certified as college-prep courses.  To be considered for admission to California’s public universities, students must complete fifteen year-long UC-approved school courses with a grade C or better:

History and Social Science, 2 years

English, 4 years

Math, 3 years

Lab science, 2 years (3 recommended)

Foreign Language, 2 years (3 recommended)

Arts, 1 year of dance, drama, music or visual art

Elective, 1 year

The law is packaged as dropout prevention. But easing graduation requirements doesn’t lower dropout rates. In fact, rigorous graduation requirements have been found to reduce the dropout rate for high poverty students. The law’s actual effect will be reduced post-high school options for all of California’s more than 6 million public school students. The law also sends the clear message that the arts and foreign language are not as important to the state as the other subjects.

As states, districts, and schools continue to focus more narrowly on reading and math at the expense of subjects like art and foreign language, we’re disappointed to see California follow this trend.

Stephanie Porowski

Posted in Arts, Foreign Language | 2 Comments »

The “Continuous Narrowing” of ESEA

October 17th, 2011

In September 2009, when reauthorization of ESEA seemed imminent, Secretary Duncan said, “Let us build a law that discourages a narrowing of curriculum and promotes a well-rounded education that draws children into sciences and history, languages and the arts in order to build a society distinguished by both intellectual and economic prowess.”

Now, more than two years later, Sen. Harkin has released a draft ESEA reauthorization proposal. And, in spite of the Department’s significant influence, the draft bill’s support of the “well-rounded education” Duncan touted is, well, almost undetectable.

The document is 860 pages long. Student achievement in “Core Academic Subjects” is referenced a dozen times, but specifics never arise. This tome contains no mentions of chemistry, physics, or biology, for example. Music gets four mentions; art only one. And history and civics just two. How are we going to improve education if no one is willing to talk about the substance of what is being taught?

Meanwhile, the shape, method, and approach to accountability measures continue to be tweaked, tuned, and obsessed over. The big news the draft contains is a reinvention of the current accountability system, scrapping AYP’s strict performance targets in favor of a measure of “continuous improvement” for all students and for particular subgroups.

But “continuous improvement” will do nothing to address ESEA’s intense focus on math and reading at the expense of the rest of the liberal arts. Although the bill would shift testing requirements to include measures for student growth, required tests would continue to measure student achievement in only math, reading and science. And the science test would remain inconsequential to “continuous improvement.” Why not widen the lens of the “continuous improvement” measure to include other subjects? It is an idea that would present many challenges and face many obstacles, but it is at least worth discussing.

Writing about the unintended consequences of NCLB, Diane Ravitch and Checker Finn predicted, “Rich kids will study philosophy and art, music and history, while their poor peers will fill in bubbles on test sheets. The lucky few will spawn the next generation of tycoons, political leaders, inventors, authors, artists and entrepreneurs. The less lucky masses will see narrower opportunities.”

We know that is happening already. And if anything resembling Harkin’s draft becomes law, the problem will only get worse.

Lynne Munson

Posted in Arts, Assessment, Curriculum, English/Language Arts, ESEA, Foreign Language, History/Social Studies, Math and Science | No Comments »

History Matters

September 22nd, 2011

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin, writes that history matters—and our students poor performance in the subject is cause for concern:

“It’s the other things that subjects like history impart: critical thinking, research skills, and the ability to communicate clearly and cogently. Such skills are certainly important for those at the top, but in today’s economy they are fundamental to performance at nearly every level … . Now is a time to re-establish history’s importance in American education.”

Augustine’s not the first businessman to argue for history education because of the skills its study engenders—the so-called 21st century skills particularly important in the face of economic recession. But he understands rightly that only deep interaction with the content of history can build these skills. He writes, “Having traveled in 109 countries in this global economy, I have developed a considerable appreciation for the importance of knowing a country’s history and politics.”

In 1985, historian Paul Gagnon also made an argument for the study of history—but not because that particular generation of students needed it more than others. According to Gagnon, history’s offerings transcend generational needs:

“If American education is ever to be made democratic, so that, as deTocqueville said, democracy may be educated, nothing will be more crucial than a common, sequential study of history throughout the elementary and secondary years. Only history, and particularly the study of Western civilization, can begin to help us find who we are and what choices we have before us.”

Stephanie Porowski

Posted in History/Social Studies | No Comments »

Educating Our Students for the Future

September 16th, 2011

Are education reformers—and even educators themselves—capable of forecasting the education “essentials” of tomorrow?  In an article for Education Week, Christopher Doyle challenges the notion of a set of 21st century skills. Historically, he writes, we have been unsuccessful at predicting skills essential to the future. He points to forward-thinking talents like Einstein, Freud, Gandhi, and Picasso, “those truly oriented to the future,” who felt “alienated in their own time.” Such artists and thinkers deviated from the educational norms of their day to blaze their own paths to success.

In contrast to those who would teach the skills of the future, he offers his agenda as a teacher:

“It is to teach my subject matter, history, to the best of my ability. This includes trying to understand and reach a generation of high school students whose intellectual world is increasingly fragmented into sound bites, PowerPoint bullets, text messages, Facebook posts, and “tweets,” and who appear rapidly to be losing the capacity for lengthy reading, synthesis of thought, and critical analysis. My agenda also encompasses linking the past to current events such as climate change, economic and debt crises, and wars on terrorism. I aspire additionally to teach empathy and ethics, qualities that I believe the discipline of history is uniquely capable of developing. And I seek to improve my students’ skill at writing while sharpening their capacity for critical thought.

“I do not know if any of this qualifies as ‘21st century.’ It often seems difficult enough; yet it appears far more realistic and hopeful to stick to my subject than to chart a suspect course toward a badly drawn image of the future.”

Still, reformers, such as the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, continue to re-package skills that have been taught for centuries in shiny new jargon.  Leaving us to wonder if the artists and philosophers of tomorrow are being any better served in the classrooms of the 21st century than they were in those of the 19th.

Hillary Marder

Posted in 21st Century Skills | 2 Comments »

Good Technology Won’t Cover for Bad Curriculum

September 13th, 2011

Even in the midst of budget cuts, education leaders are investing billions of dollars in technology. School leaders, education reformers, and the business world, in particular, herald digital devises that “let students learn at their own pace, teach skills needed in a modern economy and hold the attention of a generation weaned on gadgets” as education’s next savior.

But the technological emphasis is largely untested and, when available, data shows moderate if any student achievement gains. Fordham’s Peter Meyer offers insight:

“[I]t would seem … as happened to the charter school movement, which spent lots of time and energy debating the chartering process and defending it in the face of frequent lackluster performance numbers, the technological classroom is late to an appreciation of the essential elements of education; mainly, the importance of knowledge.  What should our kids know?  David Cohen of the University of Michigan told a gathering of education journalists last May (see my Digital Divide post) that all the technology in the world won’t help if you don’t get the curriculum right.  (And speaking of charters, I once asked KIPP co-founder David Levin how important curriculum was to KIPP’s success. ‘Very,’ he said.)”

Read more, here.

Posted in Curriculum, Technology | No Comments »

Cut and Pasted!

September 1st, 2011

Our disagreement with the skills-centric movement in education, particularly our criticism of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21), is no secret. We’ve criticized P21 again and again for their evidence-free rhetoric, shallow curricular models, and “cut-and-paste” approach to subject matter knowledge (Why learn things when you can just find them on the Internet?). So we’re chagrined to find ourselves the victim of a P21 “cut-and-paste.”

P21 has included an unrepresentative excerpt of one of our curriculum Maps in its new Common Core Toolkit (see page 18). They’ve done this in a manner which reveals, once again, their deep misunderstanding of the key role that subject matter knowledge plays in learning.

P21 cut and pasted the overview of our Grade 8, Unit 4 unit on “Authors and Artists” into their document:

In this unit, students step back and consider the motivations of authors and artists alike: What inspires artists? Are their inspirations similar or different? How is the process of creating a painting or sculpture similar to and different from the process of writing a story or poem? Students read books written about artists and study artwork found in museums across America. Students work with classmates to discern the unspoken meaning in literature and art. Students also discuss illustrations and other forms of commercial art, looking for differences and similarities in fine and commercial art, in terms of both its motivation and its presentation. They write an informative/explanatory essay about an artist of interest. The unit ends with an informative/explanatory essay in response to the essential question: How are artists and authors similar?

P21 put forward this, along with two (of our eight) CCSS “focus” standards from our unit, as one of eight “Sample ELA Lesson Starters” in its toolkit. It offered no other specifics from our unit, which lists 10 specific student learning objective, recommends more then two dozen readings on figures from Mark Twain to Mary Cassatt, Maya Angelou to Marc Chagall, along with eight paintings, and seventeen student activities illustrating how to meet the new standards while deepening student knowledge of important authors and artists.  Here’s just one example of the kind of activity we recommend:

Examine and discuss the variety of perspectives used by the artists in the artworks (e.g., worm’s-eye view, sitting at the table, far away, or up close). Identify the perspective in each work. How does the perspective affect the viewer’s relationship to the work? For instance, in the works by Caravaggio and Cézanne, does it seem as if there is a spot left for the viewer at the table? How does this differ from the perspective in [Hieronymous] Bosch’s work? What about [Chuck] Close’s? How do these artists use perspective to draw viewers in? Write responses to these questions in your journal and share with a partner prior to class discussion. Discuss how this compares to authors’ use of point of view in the characters they create.

Our Maps are informed by the cognitive science that has demonstrated that in order to think critically about a topic, students must study content directly related to it. As Andy Rotherham and Dan Willingham write, “All content is not equally important to mathematics, or to science, or to literature. To think critically, students need the knowledge that is central to the domain.”

As much as we want to share our work, we do not appreciate P21 cannibalizing our curriculum Maps and do not believe that their appropriation can be helpful to anyone. The teachers who wrote our Maps worked tirelessly to connect the skills identified in the standards with rich texts and works of art, with essential knowledge. And now their work is being further enhanced by the teachers nationwide who are using our Maps to create their own informed and imaginative lessons. We’d prefer P21 not cheapen their work and ours with a sloppy “cut and paste.”

Lynne Munson

 

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

What We’re Reading

August 26th, 2011

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

“When Will I Ever Use That?” Core Knowledge Blog

“‘Relevant’ isn’t supposed to be a synonym for dumbed-down.”

California Museums Can Help California Schools, Huffington Post Education

Arts organizations can be powerful catalysts for civic engagement:  “There has never been a greater need for libraries and museums to work with other organizations in effectively serving our communities; there has never been a more rapid period of change affecting museums, libraries”

Academics Find Common Standards Fit for College, Education Week

Finally, what college professors have to say about the Common Core State Standards.

From the Trenches: The Report of Our Death Has Been Greatly Exaggerated, SB&O Magazine

Are the arts really in decline?

First an east-coast earthquake; now Irene. Enjoy your weekend!

 

Posted in What We're Reading | No Comments »

Teachers and Reform

August 24th, 2011

As students across the nation head back to school, their teachers have a bigger than usual lift ahead. They bear the brunt of many recent education reforms: from new standards and assessments to changes in teacher evaluation. Yesterday, we listened to none other than AFT’s Randi Weingarten and AEI’s Rick Hess discuss “When Reform Touches Teachers.” It’s an issue that we, as an organization focused on what gets taught, consider often.

Not shocking to find that Weingarten, a union leader, and Hess, a right-leaning education thinker, find little common ground on the macro issues, such as the role of unions like the AFT. But encouraging to hear them agree on one important issue: Both Weingarten and Hess believe teachers must be deeply involved in decisions about teaching and pedagogy.

As Weingarten puts it: “What are the tools and conditions teachers need to do their jobs?”

With this in mind, we recently surveyed teachers across the country to learn how policies have impacted their classrooms. We asked teachers on the front lines of reform to provide detailed reporting on what they see happening in their classrooms and schools. How are they spending class time? How does state testing affect what they do? Which subjects get more attention and which get less?

The answers augment what was previously only anecdotal evidence: Teachers—for both better and worse—are experiencing a policy-driven shift in how and what they teach.

Look for a full report on our findings, coming this Fall.

Stephanie Porowski

 

Posted in Assessment, Curriculum, Teacher Perspective | 1 Comment »

What We’re Reading

August 19th, 2011

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

ACT Deems More Students College-Ready, Education Week

But 75% of students still aren’t ready.

Teaching Cultural Literacy is a Matter of Social Justice, Core Knowledge Blog

The battle for core knowledge for all students continues.

We Can’t Predict the Future; We Can Teach the Essential, Fordham’s Education Gadfly

“Regardless of what is the hip new medium, we do our students a grave disservice by pretending that pithy diatribes or observational blog posts are on the same level as more thoughtful, well-developed arguments, grounded in evidence derived from texts, with clear theses that come from something other than their personal feelings.”

Ed School’s Pedagogical Puzzle, New York Times

What’s the best way to train successful teachers?

Enjoy!

Posted in What We're Reading | No Comments »

When Taking the “Right” Courses Isn’t Enough

August 19th, 2011

ACT reports that a staggering 75% of students are unprepared for college. What’s more, many of these students were unprepared even after taking the ACT-recommended core curriculum.

Of course there’s value in a core curriculum—we’ve said so often. In general, students who took a core curriculum (four years of English and three years of science, math, and social studies) did do better on the ACT:

  • Nearly half of the students who took the ACT-recommended math curriculum passed the ACT college-readiness benchmark; in contrast to only 3% of students who took less than the recommended curriculum.
  • In English, 68% of the students who took the recommended core curriculum achieved the benchmark, while only 40% of those who did not take the recommended core made the cut.

But, disaggregated, ACT’s numbers tell a more complicated story: Barely 4% of African Americans and 11% of Hispanics met ACT benchmarks. This, in spite of the fact that 70% of these students took the recommended core curriculum.

ACT rightly points to the “the inequity of the rigor of the curriculum and of school systems as a whole.” The problem is two-fold: Many students don’t have access to higher-level courses. Nearly half a million students attend public schools that don’t offer Algebra II or equivalent courses.

But, even at schools offering the “right” courses, all-too many Algebra  II—and AP and honors—courses lack real rigor, in spite of high standards like the Common Core State Standards. Teachers cover standards and teach courses with varying depth, expectations and quality of content. As Fordham’s Kathleen Porter-Magee writes, “Blogs about boats may be entertaining but they don’t put you on the track to tackle college-level reading. It’s not fair to students to pretend they do.”

It’s not fair to students, but, with so many standards to cover and so much content to teach, it’s easy to graduate students with meaningless diplomas.

Stephanie Porowski and Meagan Estep

Posted in Curriculum | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »