Teacher World

Okay, so the news came out regarding how public schools measure up using the No Child Left Behind standards and, as expected, it isn’t pretty! In a recent report from the Associated Press, nearly half of America’s public schools failed to meet federal achievement standards this year. This marks the largest failure rate since NCLB took effect ten years ago, according to this report which was released Thursday.

The Center on Education Policy report revealed that over 43,000 schools (48 percent) did not make “average yearly progress” this year, with the lowest failure range of 11 percent in Wisconsin to the highest failure rate of 89 percent in Florida.

Earlier this year, Education Secretary Arne Duncan predicted that 82 percent of our nation’s schools would not pass muster, so maybe we should be relieved that the statistics are actually lower than his prediction. Regardless, it all reinforces the simple fact that the 2014 goal that requires states to have every student performing at grade level in math and reading is impossible to achieve. (Of course, educators have been trying to say this since the passage of NCLB, but what do we know?)

In his statement Wednesday, Duncan said, “Whether it’s 50 percent, 80 percent or 100 percent of schools being incorrectly labeled as failing, one thing is clear: No Child Left Behind is broken. That’s why we’re moving forward with giving states flexibility from the law in exchange for reforms that protect children and drive student success.”

The report also revealed huge variations in state’s scores which can be explained by a variety of factors. Some of these include the fact that some state’s tests are more difficult, and some states have higher numbers of low-income and immigrant children. Additionally, NCLB mandates that states must raise the passage rate each year, and some states put off the largest increase until this year in hopes of avoiding sanctions.

Jack Jennings, president of the Washington D.C-based Center on Education Policy said that the law, which should have been rewritten four years ago, is “too crude a measure” to give a clear picture of what is happening in schools. However, due to the bipartisan atmosphere in Congress, lawmakers seem unable to agree on how to fix it.

He told The Associated Press, “No Child Left Behind is defective. It needs to be changed. If Congress can’t do it, then the administration is right to move ahead with waivers.”

Recently, President Obama and Arne Duncan have agreed to allow states to file for waivers allowing them to use a variety of additional factors to determine whether they are successful and also to choose how their schools will be punished if they don’t show improvement. Some of these other factors include using college-entrance exam scores and adding the performance of students on their Advanced Placement tests.

With at least 39 states and Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico planning to file waivers, Republicans in Congress are accusing Duncan and the president of using waivers to push a “backdoor education agenda” that will let schools off the hook at the end of the day.

Owen Rust, a Yahoo contributor, published a commentary after this news was released which reemphasizes the dangers of allowing the House education committee to rewrite NCLB.

Rust reported that, according to the biographies of the members of this important committee, none have worked as certified teachers in a K-12 classroom. Glen Thompson, Representative from the fifth district of Pennsylvania, has a background in education but worked in health care. Lou Barletta, Representative from Pennsylvania’s 11th district, majored in elementary education before he left school to try out for a Major League baseball team. And Virginia Foxx, Congresswoman from North Carolina’s fifth district, was a full-time educator, but she taught at the college level, which is very different from teaching in K-12 public school systems.

Apparently, several members of the committee also served on their local school boards early in their political careers. That seems to be the sum total of this committee’s educational experience, leaving many to question, as teachers have from the start, just how qualified these politicians are to be formulating educational policies.

While I have no doubt that this committee is comprised of some very intelligent, caring, and successful legislators, the lack of educational background, training, or experience is troublesome, to say the least.

Would you ask educators to devise business policy? Of course not! So how is it that a group of people with no education background have the expertise to dictate what happens in our classrooms and in our schools? Doesn’t anyone else see the absurdity of this situation?

Georgia schools Superintendent John Barge said, “A lot of educators saw the weaknesses in No Child Left Behind even when it was rolled out – that this day and time would come. It’s kind of a train wreck that we all see happening.”

Before we just continue the train wreck, shouldn’t this committee work with real educators to formulate an education policy that is reasonable and doable? Let’s get rid of No Child Left Behind and replace it with a policy that is best for students (and that does not mean judging their proficiency from a standardized test) and best for our public schools.

Educational Reform, No Child Left Behind, Teacher-World's Blog Arne Duncan, Center on Education Policy, No Child Left Behind, President Obama

Finally, some welcome news regarding No Child Left Behind, but it’s still not what President Obama has been asking for; reforming the federal education law before the beginning of this school year. Let’s look at why reform is necessary and what will be happening until true reform occurs on this law.

Since federal educational aid is directly linked to standardized testing results under NCLB, this law has received criticism from many. One of the legitimate concerns with this link between aid and test results is that it causes teachers to focus primarily on the material that would elevate test scores. And yet, in spite of a proposal which was introduced 16 months ago and countless Congressional meetings and hearings held to fix NCLB, no agreement has been reached due to “partisan politics in the House,” according to a statement by the Department of Education.

Arne Duncan, Secretary of the Department of Education said that NCLB is “forcing districts into one-size-fits-all solutions that just don’t work. The President understands this and he has directed us to move ahead in providing relief.”

The director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, Melody Barnes, stated, “American’s future competitiveness is being decided today, in classrooms across the nation. With no clear path to a bipartisan bill in Congress, the President has directed us to move forward with an administrative process to provide flexibility within the law for states and districts that are willing to embrace reform.”

Earlier, I wrote a blog about Idaho demanding a third year in a row without raising the proficiency targets in math and reading, relief that does not comply with NCLB. Until agreement for true reform of NCLB is reached, under this new process, states like Idaho that are seeking relief from certain provisions of NCLB will receive that relief, but they must “demonstrate commitment to education reform.” Now, I confess that I have no idea how states are to demonstrate that commitment because there were no details in the article to explain this. Barnes was quick to add that this policy is “not a pass on accountability.”

In the meantime, the administration is continuing to forge ahead on the reform of NCLB with a plan that provides for an accountability system which is more flexible and more targeted, based on measuring annual student growth on college-and career-ready standards. The plan would focus on data and the quality of a district’s teachers and principals. This “flexibility package” with all of its details, will be made public in September. 

Duncan remained hopeful that true reform will be attained soon. “We’re still hopeful that Congress can continue its work this fall. In the meantime, states and districts have an opportunity to move forward.”

Educational Reform, No Child Left Behind, state achievement tests, Teacher-World's Blog Arne Duncan, Educational Reform, No Child Left Behind, President Obama, state waivers

On this Memorial Day, we come together as a nation to pay homage to the countless people who gave their lives to secure our liberty and protect our basic rights. We, at Teacher World, want to express our sincere appreciation for all that our military personnel have done to protect, not just this country that we love so much, but to help protect citizens in other countries whose liberties or rights have been threatened. We pay special homage to those who are currently serving in a branch of the military and wish them peace and a safe return to their family members very soon.

As we celebrate the memory of these valiant soldiers, I can’t help but think of the everyday soldiers in our country, who don’t wear a uniform, but serve their fellow man just as diligently, especially in times of great need, and therefore, deserve our gratitude and prayers as well.

In light of recent events, the proud, resilient people of Joplin, Missouri, and so many others who have come from all parts of the United States to battle the total devastation that was left by the tornado that hit just a little over a week ago, come to my mind as excellent examples of these everyday heroes.

There are so many people who have shown tremendous bravery and heroism during and after this terrible tragedy, and I wish I knew the stories of each and every one. Though that is simply impossible, I will tell you about those I can, and I leave it up to those of you who are in Joplin to continue to tell the world the rest.

There were so many nameless people who opened their businesses, their storage rooms, and their walk-in coolers for those who were out driving or walking when the storm hit. Had it not been for these resourceful people, countless others would have been numbered with the dead. Two of these heroes paid the ultimate price, as they sought to protect as many people from the storm as they could. President Obama honored the memory of these brave men in his memorial address.

He told the crowd about Dean Wells, a hero who ushered both his co-workers and customers at Home Depot to a safe place to wait out the store. Not content to save a few, he kept going back for more people, bringing each to safety. Just like a military leader protecting his troops, Dean did not stop until the storm finally stopped him. Sadly, Dean’s mission as well as his life ended when a wall of the store fell down on top of him, but many lives were saved as a result of his bravery.

Christopher Lucas was the 26-year old manager at a Pizza Hut in Joplin. He literally herded his employees and customers into a walk-in freezer, and then, in order to keep them secure and safe, he wrapped a bungee cord to hold the door shut from the inside and wrapped the other end around his arm. He held on to that bungee cord for as long as he possible could, until the incredible force of the tornado’s 200 mph winds finally pulled him away. His heroic efforts that night saved more than a dozen people’s lives.

Then there’s Jason, the tree cutter and his crew, who watched the storm coming in and the trees and debris flying, but rather than run for cover themselves, they got their chainsaws and began cutting up and removing trees from the roads knowing that ambulances and fire engines would need to be able to pass through. When Jason began to hear screaming coming from houses, he ran to the houses, isolated where the screams were coming from, and dug and cut his way to them in order to move them to the street. Jason continued to do this for four or five hours.

Jason said that one of the houses had smoke pouring out of it, so he cut an opening in the roof in order to get inside. In his urgency to get to the victims, he went through the hole, only to have the wall give way and be showered by burning ash. Luckily, Jason, an everyday hero, lived to tell his story.

Then there is Mark Norton, Will Norton’s father, who held on desperately to his son who was being pulled through the sun roof of his car. In spite of his own injuries, which were massive, he held on tightly until the strength of the winds was stronger than the strength of a father’s arms. I want Mark to know that he made the most heroic effort to save his son. Will knew that and so does the family. Not every soldier’s mission is successful, Mark. It is the valiant effort against all odds that we honor, and pray that you will find the courage to forgive yourself for a force that was simply too powerful to be stopped. 

We need to honor Will’s Aunt Tracey and his sister, Sara, who diligently tracked down every lead to try to find him, alive or dead. Their compassion for the many families who were going through a similar hell touched everyone who heard their words of faith and strength. Their stoic response to the worst possible news and their obvious faith, even when faced with such a seemingly unfair loss, is a true example of heroism which rises above personal sorrow.

Dan Mitchell, president of the Bridge Ministries, who has been so instrumental in trying to organize rescue efforts and set up distribution centers, has been a hero to so many. Through his heroic efforts, he worked with the family of Lantz Hare, a friend and parishioner of his, to get definitive proof that he was one of the victims of this terrible storm.

Additionally, it was his strong plea for urgent help and his insistence that it was time for someone to step in and do for Joplin what the grief-stricken, tired community cannot do for themselves, the whole time being so respectful of the work that those in charge have been doing, that also makes this man a hero.

Listen to his heroic words: “We are forced into a major operation where we’re organizing efforts to make a difference, to make the straightest line to the victims. And all of us are traumatized, too, by the friends we’ve lost and just the fear of life and death; things that have occurred here over the last few days…this is a strong community, and there’s a deep faith here. And God is good at bringing order out of chaos, and that’s what’s happening.”

When he was asked about the President’s visit, and what he would like to say to him if he had the chance to talk to him, he pleaded, on behalf of Joplin, for the government to step in, to take control. He said he had heard in a meeting that other agencies were unwilling to step on anyone’s toes by coming in and offering help. His answer: “We’re overwhelmed; we need you…We do need some help, I think our local officials are amazing men and women, and they are doing an incredible job under the circumstances, but there’s more here than we can do…So, I would say, let’s step on, go ahead and step on our toes, and help!”

A true hero knows when he has done everything he can do on his own, and has the courage to ask for help. Dan Mitchell has been a heroic presence in Joplin and has sacrificed his time and energy to help the families, especially his kids from Bridge Ministry, get back on their feet. But, he knows when it is time to step aside and let others, who have more resources, take charge. Thank you for your heroic dedication, your tireless efforts, and your willingness to step out of the limelight in order to get things done.

There are so many more: parents searching for their children and children searching for their parents, Governor Nixon who has worked tirelessly to get more help for the people of Joplin, and ministers who hold church services in the street because the churches they once served have been leveled. This list goes on; everyday people rising to the challenge of this terrible tragedy to become heroes to us all.

President Obama summed it up so well in his memorial speech when he said, “There are heroes around us all the time. And so, in the wake of this tragedy, let us live up to their example, to make each day count, to live with a sense of mutual regard, to live with that same compassion that they demonstrated in their final hours. We are called by them to do everything we can to be worthy of this chance we’ve been given to carry on.”

Teacher-World's Blog Dan Mitchell, Governor Nixon, Joplin, Mark Norton, Memorial Day, Missouri, President Obama, Will Norton

Yesterday, I began a blog about President Obama’s plan to fix No Child Left Behind. Since his plan is rather lengthy, I tried to make it more palpable by breaking it down into two blogs. If you haven’t read my previous blog, you will want to start there or this will make little sense. I had discussed Obama’s first four details of his plan, so I will start this blog with his fifth.

Because schools that are doing well are frequently mislabeled “failing” under NCLB, the President’s fifth proposal is to offer states and school districts more flexibility when it comes to determining areas which require improvement and strategies which would address poor performance. He would continue to place expectations on struggling schools to make necessary changes to become more successful.

Frankly, I think most schools are already working to identify where improvements need to be made and developing the necessary strategies through collaboration to do just that, so I’m unclear how this is different from current policy, except perhaps doing away with the label “failing.” Unless, I’m not reading this correctly, this seems like a lot of gobbledygook.

The President’s sixth proposal addresses the valid concern that at this time it is frequently the case that schools which face the greatest challenges don’t have the most effective teachers. Obama proposes providing incentives and accountability to get effective teachers to work in these schools and to identify effective teachers and use them as mentors for less effective teachers.

Let’s face it; the reason why many effective teachers are unwilling to work in challenging schools is because these schools are usually intercity schools where the teachers battle far more than low academic performance. I would also assert that there are probably many effective teachers in these schools already but they are laboring against such unbelievable odds that their effectiveness is not even recognized.  But if teachers who have been labeled effective are willing to take advantage of incentives to teach in challenging schools, more power to them. I would hope that the effective teachers already in those schools would receive the same incentives to stay.

I heartily support President Obama’s sixth proposal: to get away from federal government’s “one size fits all” solutions, and increasing local control to track down their own solutions to address problems in their schools. Yes, get the federal government out of our business so that we can more effectively proceed with the business of educating our children!

The next phase of President Obama’s plan addresses the fact that NCLB does not promote or reward innovation in our schools. His plan calls for extending the school day and school year, creating smarter tests, using collected data to improve teaching methods, raising standards for all kids, and supporting grant programs which reward both states and schools who find better ways to get highly effective teachers in the classroom.

The only issue I have with this last part of his plan is the idea of increasing the school day. I recently wrote a blog which advocates going to year-round school. We all know that the first month or so of school is spent reteaching the skills from the year before because our students all suffer from amnesia over the summer. If we want to stay competitive with other nations, we must look realistically at year-round schools. But a longer school day? No way! We risk student and teacher burn-out if our days are made significantly longer, and I believe the extra minutes tacked on are not worth the price we will pay.

Next, Obama addresses the fact that, under NCLB, the schools which are the lowest-performing schools simply do not have the resources or the reforms to make necessary improvements. The President’s solution: “Invest in ambitious and bold efforts to transform our nation’s lowest achieving schools, while demanding new and dramatic change in their leadership and reforms to teaching and learning at those schools.”

I’m sorry, but this just sounds like political talk, in fact I couldn’t even figure out how to put this in my own words, which is why I gave you the exact quote. What does this really mean? How is this really going to happen? And who’s paying for it? Blah, blah, blah!

The President then claims that currently, many parents are not engaged in their children’s education, and schools are not always welcoming of parents. Again, I must quote directly from Obama whose plan supports that we “double the federal investment in family engagement” (what the heck does that mean?) and that incentives be provided for schools which create innovative ways of engaging parents and community members.

Yes, parents do need to get more involved in their children’s education, although I’m uncertain how doubling “the federal investment” is going to encourage that. (What does that even mean?) If President Obama’s plan could focus as much attention on ineffective parents as it does on ineffective teachers, we might see some real changes in our schools.

And, while it may be true that some schools are not welcoming of parents, I would argue that the vast majority of elementary schools are. In my school, for instance, I can honestly say that I don’t think a day goes by that I don’t see parents in our building helping their child’s teacher, attending a function in their child’s classroom, meeting with the principal over a school project, etc. 

President Obama’s final focus is on rural schools, as he concludes that currently states don’t have the resources to adequately provide support for rural schools which face unique challenges. Obama’s plan supports the innovation, reform, and better funding of rural schools particularly in regards to better use of technology. Finally, and here we go again, he calls for the need to recruit and retain effective principals and teachers in rural schools.

So, how do I feel about these proposals to fixing No Child Left Behind? Frankly, I am somewhat ambivalent. While I wholeheartedly support fixing this ridiculously punitive legislation with its cookie-cutter view of education, and its idiotic expectation of 100% passage of state tests by 2014, I have been in education long enough to know that whatever new policy is adopted will eventually be thrown out only to be replaced with a new policy, which in time will also be thrown out only to be replaced with a new policy yet again…

And educators become pawns in the hands of those who have the power to make the decisions; we are expected to embrace the policies, or we will be held accountable when the newest policy fails. Ironically, we who know the most from first-hand experience in the trenches are not asked to share our opinions. We have no voice, but we will be expected to be good, little soldiers ready to fight the next policy’s battles. It just gets old after awhile. And I get so tired of the political rhetoric instead of real solutions to real problems.

Those of us who teach have no choice but to wait this next round out. The good news is that, from the looks of President Obama’s plan and based on how terrible NCLB has been, anything he is proposing would be better than this broken, unrealistic policy.

So, my ultimate reaction is to wait it all out, to try not to be too cynical, and to hope for the best. What about the rest of you? Let us know how you feel.

Educational Reform, low-performing schools, No Child Left Behind, state achievement tests, Teacher-World's Blog Educational Reform, effective teachers, No Child Left Behind, President Obama, state achievement tests

I’m sure you are aware of the fact that President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have both expressed the need to fix the No Child Left Behind policy which has been so detrimental to the educational process in America. In March, President Obama urged Congress to make necessary changes to NCLB before the beginning of the 2011-2012 school year. But, if you’re like me, you’re wondering what this new reform will look like, what it will require from you as a teacher, and if it’s going to be just another piece of legislature which will only further punish teachers.

Why change it now? Well, finally the powers-that-be have figured out what teachers have been trying to say ever since Bush forged ahead with NCLB legislation: there is no way that we will ever get 100% passage on state achievement tests, let alone by 2014, as the law currently mandates. 

So, what does the President suggest for the future of education? Frankly, even after reading the fact sheet which the White House sent out explaining Obama’s priorities for fixing NCLB, I’m not sure that any of the difficult questions or concerns have been answered or even addressed. Let’s take a look at some of his statements and see if, together, we can find any concrete details hidden in the rhetoric.

First, the President listed the following key priorities for reforming NCLB:

* A fair accountability system that shares responsibility for improvement and rewards excellence, and that is based on high standards and is informed by sophisticated assessments that measure individual student growth;

(How is this different from what we already have? Except for the words “fair accountability” and “shares responsibility for improvement,” I’m not sure I see anything new here. And terms like fair and share are rather vague. Who will determine what a fair system of accountability is or how responsibility for improvement will be shared?)

* A flexible system that empowers principals and teachers, and supports reform and innovation at the state and local level;

(Blah, blah, blah! Get to the point and tell us how that will work.)

* And a system focused on the schools and the students most at risk — that targets resources to persistently low-performing schools and ensures the most effective teachers serve students most in need.

(This one I get. I think we all would agree that schools and students at risk need additional resources to turn them around. But does he mean that the most effective teachers would be given the option to serve students most in need, or would they be forced to serve those most in need? Big difference here, in my opinion; if they are going to be forced, I wouldn’t be surprised if some highly effective teachers become less effective overnight.)

These priorities are followed by a fact sheet about fixing NCLB, which you can read for yourself. You probably know these facts yourself and have probably even experienced them in your own school and classroom.

So, let’s just skip to the punch line and explore President Obama’s plan. I am skipping to the last section of this White House post because I continue to read a lot of rhetoric in the section outlining his plan, and find more concrete details in the comparison between NCLB and Obama’s plan. Since there are eleven of these key comparisons, I will address the first four here and the rest in my next blog. Before I go through these with you, I ask that you pay attention to a not so subtle common thread within most of the President’s plan: these reforms will require a significant outlay of financial resources. In these trying economic times, does anyone else wonder where all of this capital is coming from?

First, Obama’s plan calls for better tests, doing away with the lovely bubble tests we have all come to hate. In order to accomplish this, his administration has invested a small fortune, $350 million, to support states in their creation of tests which will measure 21st century skills and measure problem solving. And he wants these tests to provide prompter feedback which would be instrumental in improving instruction.

Now, I am not sure what he means by 21st century skills. At the elementary level we teach basic skills in reading and math, so I would love some clarification on this one. But, I totally get the need to improve our students’ problem solving skills. Most of our students can perform well on questions which are straight forward and ask for the regurgitation of facts or the use of math skills, but those same students fall apart when they are expected to take that same information or skill and manipulate it in any kind of problem solving activity. This is a life-skill which is sadly lacking yet so important.

Obama’s second plan is to reverse the NCLB policy of judging schools on a pass-fail system based on how students performed on one test administered on one day, to rewarding teachers, principals, and schools that can show that their students are showing academic improvement.

Any plan that removes the punitive measures currently attached to these ridiculously-random-sometimes-poorly-written-designed-to-trick-students-state-achievement-tests sounds good to me, and I’m sure to most teachers and administrators out there. And I wholeheartedly agree that school systems should be evaluated on student progress and improvement. Reward that, and stop punishing schools for scores on one-time-administered tests. 

Obama’s third proposed reform claims that under NCLB, states lowered their standards in order to meet their yearly goals, requiring some high school graduates to take remedial courses in college. His plan supports governors and education leaders in each state to work together to adopt college and career ready standards to ensure that students are ready for college upon graduation.

I take offense right off the bat with the implication that schools and teachers have lowered their standards because, supposedly, their states have. I adamantly deny that claim. As a matter of fact, I think the opposite has occurred in most of our nation’s schools. I see teachers working harder to cover more curriculum than ever before. Why? Because we are all working our collective butts off to get our children to do well on their state tests. However, I feel that we would teach more effectively if what we teach wasn’t so dictated by these tests.

Obama’s fourth plan, and the last one I will cover in this blog, is to combat the current narrow focus of our schools’ curriculum on math and reading alone by investing  in both state and local efforts to develop curriculum which is not primarily structured around math and reading but is well-rounded including other subjects in their accountability system.

Let’s be honest here for just a minute. Isn’t it true that you focus more attention and concentrated effort on those subjects that your students will be tested on that year? Of course you do. As a result, equally important curriculum is fit in where and when time allows. This has been one of the worst casualties of NCLB. It’s not fair to teachers or to our students that we often feel pressured to sacrifice a well-rounded curriculum for a math, reading, and at fifth grade, science based curriculum.

I will let this settle and hopefully get some feedback from some of you teachers and parents out there. What do you think of fixing NCLB, and what do you think of Obama’s plan so far?

I’d love some comments on this one, so weigh in!

Educational Reform, No Child Left Behind, Teacher-World's Blog No Child Left Behind, President Obama, state achievement tests

Have you heard about President Obama’s new campaign called “Educate to Innovate”? The purpose of this campaign, as spelled out on whitehouse.gov is “to improve the participation and performance of America’s students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).” According to this website, the Administration, backed by the Federal Government, foundations, big companies, science and engineering societies, and non-profits, plans to participate in several events, activities, and announcements to support the President’s plan, making it a national priority.

Why this national initiative? Apparently recent data suggests that United States students are not stacking up in the fields of math and science. And what is the data that has been used for this shocking revelation? The 2006 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) comparison and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) math tests. Okay, I’ll bite! I have no idea what these are. Does anyone know?

Well, I did some checking and I don’t believe that the 2006 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) comparison  has ever been administered at our school, I don’t know about yours, and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) math tests are given to select students from select schools. Again, I never heard of any fourth graders in our school system taking this test either. But, let’s say I accept the findings of these random studies which I have never heard of. What is the purpose behind this gigantic and expensive initiative?

Here are the goals behind this movement, directly from the website:

* Increase STEM literacy so that all students can learn deeply and think critically in science, math, engineering, and technology.
* Move American students from the middle of the pack to top in the next decade.
* Expand STEM education and career opportunities for underrepresented groups, including women and girls.

Now, all of this sounds great! But I want to know the how! Tell me exactly what the plan is and how it will affect all children. I want to know how it will motivate my students, and what kind of technology we will receive to get them interested in utilizing technology, or what lab equipment we will receive to enable them to get excited about scientific inquiry. How will schools be involved, or will they at all? I am so tired of hearing about all of the money going into educational reform but not really seeing how that money or those innovations trickle down to my school system. I’ve talked about transparency before, and this is the next big idea in education that sounds so good. But after reading this article, I walked away with no clear idea of what is actually going to happen with this new plan. Please read it for yourself, and then join me in asking the Administration to spell it out clearly and thoroughly for the rest of us: How is this really going to work? Give us specifics because the first stage, as outlined on this website, does little to convince me that there is a specific plan in place to achieve a great goal.

Please, don’t get me wrong! I am for STEM. I just want it S-P-E-L-L-E-D O-U-T. Make me see it!

Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog Educate to Innovate, Educational Reform, engineering, mathematics, President Obama, science, STEM, technology

Over the next few weeks, I will be blogging about Race to the Top, the national contest to find creative ways to improve education in the United States. First, let me give you a brief summary of the goals of Race to the Top, or RttT, as it is called.

It all started last February with the signing of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 by President Obama. The purpose of this legislation is to “stimulate the economy, support job creation, and invest in critical sectors, including education. The ARRA lays the foundation for education reform by supporting investments in innovative strategies that are most likely to lead to improved results for students, long-term gains in school and school system capacity, and increased productivity and effectiveness”. This act is providing $4.35 billion in grant money to the RttT fund, to “encourage and reward states that are creating the conditions for education innovation and reform; achieving significant improvement in student outcomes, including making substantial gains in student achievement, closing achievement gaps, improving high school graduation rates, and ensuring student preparation for success in college and careers; and implementing ambitious plans in four core education reform areas:
 
Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;

Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;

Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and

Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.”

The states chosen as finalists in this national competition are Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee. Winners will be chosen in April, and the school systems that were part of their state’s application process will be the models for implementing their detailed plan of recovery for their state.

Wow! Quite a venture with some awesome potential! If you haven’t read anything else about it, follow my link above, and do some other reading about it because, in my next blogs, I will be discussing my state’s plan and what I think of the process and the proposals. Interesting reading! Talk to you again after you’ve done your homework! Enjoy!

Educational Reform, Funding Education, High Caliber Schools, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, education reform, President Obama, Race to the Top, state competition

Okay, by now we’ve all read about it and seen news reports about it, but it continues to shock me as I consider all of the ramifications of the recent firings of all teachers in a poorly performing school in Rhode Island. As educators, we need to watch what is happening very carefully because clearly, this is coming down the pike for other schools as well. Here are some of my thoughts about what happened.

First, I find it ludicrous to buy into the philosophy that the answer to turning around ineffective schools is to fire all of the teachers in a building. Are we serious? Do we really not get the fact that the main reasons these schools are ineffective is because of their environment; the poverty, the crime, the drug and alcohol abuse, the gang violence, and myriad other factors that make more than just the schools ineffective. How do teachers get students to care about test results when they are wondering where their next meal is coming from, whether they will get beat up on their way home from school, if they will be the victim of robbery, assault, rape, or a drive-by shooting? We all watch the news. We know the prevalence of crime in these high poverty areas. Isn’t that what needs to be resolved? How will shutting down a school help solve crime and poverty; clearly roadblocks to achievement in school? And how much parental support do many of the students in these schools get? Is education a priority in these homes? How do teachers educate children who place no value on education because their parents don’t? Don’t get me wrong, I know there are many hard-working, good parents in these areas who are pushing their children to succeed, but it doesn’t change the simple truth that environment is a critical issue.

Second, is the school board in Central Falls really trying to tell us that all of the teachers on that staff were ineffective? There were no teachers on their staff worthy of retaining their jobs? While I am sure that there were teachers who were burned out and just going through the motions (which is somewhat understandable given the atmosphere in which they teach), it is beyond my ability to grasp the idiocy of lumping all teachers in that school together as incompetent. Mark my words, there were teachers on that staff who were battling against factors we cannot begin to imagine trying to elevate their students out of the environment they live in by providing them with the tools a good education would give them. How dare this board of education tell them that because the test scores have been very low, they are under qualified and do not deserve jobs! Again, when does environment take the blame? And shame on the superintendent of this school for not taking stopgap measures along the way to avoid this bloodbath. She bears equal responsibility since it is her school, and she ultimately determines who gets hired and what their credentials are. Why isn’t she being fired as well for not doing her job more effectively?

Finally, in the New York Times article reporting on the firings in Rhode Island, it was reported that Frances Gallo, the school’s superintendent, originally planned to extend the instructional hours and make additional changes to turn this school around but decided to fire all of the teachers when the union fought for extra pay for the additional 25 minutes to the teacher work day. Okay, I understand being annoyed, but is this taking it a little too far? Surely, some intermediary steps could have been agreed upon. The article goes on to say that Dr. Gallo later agreed to the possibility of hiring back some of these teachers, but she and the union could not reach an agreement. It makes me want to scream! Careers are at stake here, and an agreement cannot be reached? Preposterous! 

Needless to say, I am befuddled and angry over this decision. But the final straw for me is that President Obama supports it and applauds it. This was just the start, ladies and gentlemen. So, what that tells me is that we all need to fasten our seatbelts because it’s going to be a bumpy ride!

Changes in Teaching, High Caliber Schools, state achievement tests, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog President Obama, Rhode Island schools, Teacher's Unions, turnaround schools

Okay, so President Obama is advocating year-round school and extended hours to our school day. And I can’t help but wonder when enough is enough! His argument is that our school calendars are based on an archaic agrarian time schedule which needs revamping. And yet I ask myself, didn’t we turn out okay under this archaic calendar? Is this really about the need to compete with other countries educationally, or is it instead just a smokescreen to provide safe after-school programs for low income areas at the expense of school districts?  The president admitted as much when he announced his plan for schools. This is a bad idea for several reasons.

First, children need to be children and have time to play and spend time with their family. If the school day extends till 5:00 or 6:00, how does that leave any time for family and fun? Family time would revolve around dinner, homework, bathes, and bedtime. Much of a child’s development revolves around family and the normal activities that are part of family time in the evening. Forget that with Obama’s plan. And forget enjoying time with friends or playing outside, both important activities for developing children.

Second, what about extracurricular activities under Obama’s extended day plan? Where would sports fit into this extended schedule? How could coaches schedule practices if kids don’t even get home until early evening? What happens to after-school programs like drama, debate teams, choir, band, etc.? Am I alone in recognizing that fewer students would be able to take advantage of these programs? These are all part of a child’s educational experience, allowing them to expand their interests and become well-rounded, young people. Colleges look for extracurricular involvement in applicants. They recognize that academics are crucial but extracurricular involvement make for a more balanced individual. Involvement in these programs often teaches children about their skills and where their interests lie, which helps them plan for their future. With limited time in the evening, these programs would suffer and so would students who are unable to attend them.

Last, I would also suggest that those who advocate a longer day actually visit schools to observe elementary children for a day and see if they still think this is a great idea. Young students are tired by the afternoon, and it becomes increasingly more difficult to hold their attention as the afternoon progresses. Now, we are thinking of adding at least two more hours to their day? Do you really think that their energy level and attention will last that long? Parents, does your child’s attention level last that long at home? What are we thinking?

Again, should all students have to adjust to a longer day to provide after-school care for students who don’t have it? Not only does this seem unfair, but it seems counterproductive. President Obama and his advocates need to talk to teachers of elementary students and see what we think. It sounds great to say that adding two to three hours onto the school day will create more competitive students, but I don’t believe it will, not if students are exhausted and done by 3:00. And let’s not rule out what students stand to lose with less time in the evening. It’s a bad idea, and it hurts more than it helps!

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Teacher-World's Blog Educational Reform, extended school day, extracurriculars, low income schools, President Obama

Recently, President Obama made the national statement that our children do not spend enough time in school, which he claimed places U.S. school children at a disadvantage in a global world. He proposed a two-pronged solution to this dilemma. First, he advocates year-round school, and second, he would push to extend the school day by possibly as much as two hours. My question is: Who is going to foot the bill to make this happen?

Proposing year-round school presupposes that our schools are currently able to accommodate children throughout the summer. This is all well and good for schools that have air conditioning. Unfortunately, many schools, like the elementary schools in my district, do not. There is physically no way we could work in these buildings or expect students to learn in these hot classrooms during the summer. Logically, that means that schools would need to be air conditioned in order to safely teach children throughout our hot summer months. Who is paying for these expensive renovations? Is the state going to shell out the money, or are they going to put the burden on already-burdened taxpayers who have difficulty supporting the current school taxes? Who is going to pay the increased operating expenses to keep schools open or the increase in fuel costs to run air conditioning throughout the summer? Our over-burdened school districts?

And what about teachers’ salaries? Does President Obama think teachers will donate their time, working both extended hours and an extended calendar with no increase in salary? Who would pay for the increase in salaries? And not just for teachers. What about the bus drivers, the cafeteria workers, and the rest of the support staff? Where is this money coming from? Again, to expect it to come from the school district or increased tax revenue is just ludicrous! We can’t get renewal levies to pass in this depressed economy. Forget new levies!

This is so typical of educational reform in our country. Decisions are made without consideration of how we, who are in education, are going to be able to make it work with little to no support from the government financially. Before this reform goes any further, questions of financial feasibility need to be addressed. Our overburdened schools and communities can’t shoulder this additional financial responsibility. 

So, I ask again, President Obama: Who is going to foot the bill?

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Teacher-World's Blog Educational Reform, President Obama, school taxes, year-round school