The Summer Achievement Gap

Heat waves and humidity, sweat and sunburns are not the only pitfalls to summer, as the infamous summer achievement gap lies daunting in our future. Come September too many bundles of joy will come prancing back into our classroom having forgotten already mastered skills, putting them even farther behind. Every year students around the country suffer from a lack of academic stimulation and consequently lose substantial amounts of academic knowledge. Perhaps this year, a few less students will fall into that gap and be fortunate enough to benefit from a summer learning program.

The Baltimore Sun recently reported that the Walmart Foundation has awarded the National Summer Learning Association a grant of 11.5 million dollars to be used to fund high-quality summer learning programs. Over the next three years, ten fortunate cities will be able to use this money and hopefully close the gap just a bit more. Baltimore is one of those cities, being awarded $615,000 to go towards summer learning programs, more specifically Building Educated Leaders for Life, known as BELL.

The BELL program provides students a full day of learning with a heavy emphasis on reading and math but it does not just end there. In the afternoon students will be able to participate in science and athletics. Through this enrichment summer program, students will learn the necessary skills to advance in academics while simultaneously gaining confidence and become invested in their own learning. "When students get the skills and support they need to invest in their own success, they discover that they can be scholars, said executive director Erin Hodge-Williams.” This summer 300 middle-school-aged Baltimore students will get the high-quality summer opportunity that they deserve.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-summer-learning-20110624,0,4853077.story

Unconventional Ways to Earn Course Credits

Students learning how to sail on the Hudson River; not your typical math class. According to the New York Times, students in New York City are earning math credits through a program that teaches them sailing and the math behind the it. The same class could count instead for a science or physical education credit, depending on what the student needs to meet graduation requirements.

In order to graduate in NYC, a students needs to have earned 44 credit: 8 each in English and social studies, 6 each in science and math, 2 each in foreign language and art, 4 in gym, 1 in health, 7 in electives. What classes they take to earn those credits is largely up to the individual schools, as long as the classes have the required class hours logged and evidence of student work and progress.

Outside organizations, like the one that teaches sailing, are aligning themselves to the state curriculum and offering their programs as a way for students to earn credits toward graduation. The Y.M.C.A. fitness programs, with staff members logging student hours, can be counted for a physical education credit. United Way sponsors a program where community organizations hire teachers and offer classes at school that vary from film and video production to living environments. Internships are also popular. Each school decides how these alternative programs and classes count as credits toward graduation.

While it is refreshing to hear about classes that have students working and applying learning concepts to real life situations, such as the sailing class, it makes me wonder how this fits into a standardized system. Each school decides how to award credits for these alternative options. There is not much oversight of the school's decisions. How can we be sure students are being offered comparable classes when there is so much variety? Do these kind of classes shrug off the graduation requirement formula? Which is worth more, standardized education or variety of classes to meet different student needs?

Class size: the debate rages on

The New York Times reported this weekend on a question that has been causing school reformers to scratch their heads: how much does class size matter for students in urban environments?  The story focuses on San Diego, a district that has capped class sizes at 17 students per class for grades kindergarten-third in the 30 poorest schools in the district.  The district has shown gains in reading standardized test scores in the last several years (45% proficient to 56% proficient in three years), and the school board president believes that these gains are due, at least in part, to the smaller class sizes.  The article then goes on to explain that heavy budget cuts on all levels may cause this cap to be removed: as teachers are cut to satisfy budget requirements, class sizes will necessarily increase.  Parents, teachers, and administrators alike are worried about how the increase in class size might negatively affect learning for the youngest learners in the poorest schools. 

I believe that the school board's president's claims that class size reduction leads to better test scores should be taken with a grain of salt---correlation does not imply causation, and the article cites no specific evidence to prove any relation between class size and test scores.  However, I think that the comments made by parents and teachers in the article do shed some light on the more qualitative benefits of small class size in urban schools, especially in the younger grades.  Students with special needs (both academic and health-related) are given more personal attention.  Teachers are able to more effectively monitor student progress, attend to health and safety problems, and care for students' emotional and physical needs.  I think that the rhetoric of reformers needs to be careful about placing too much value on shaky data surrounding test score/small class correlations (data that could be easily picked apart by those who want to cut budgets and increase class sizes), and focus on getting more data on both the quantitative and qualitative advantages to small classes for young students. 

graduate degree or bust?

An article from the Huffington Post yesterday touches on an issue that affects teachers earning graduate degrees, revealing that there is no proven correlation between completing graduate classes and being a highly effective teacher. There has been recent hype claiming that a graduate degree is not beneficial and there is no guarantee students’ test scores will rise if their teacher holds a masters degree. Not only is there claim that graduate degrees are a waste of resources as expressed in the article, but it also uses standardized test scores as a means of blaming teacher effectiveness.
John Deasy, LAUSD Superintendent boldly stated, “I actually don’t want qualified teachers [ones with graduate degrees] in the classroom. I want highly effective teachers [test score manipulators] in the classroom.”
To comment first on Deasy’s statement, I think it is imperative that all teachers need to be highly effective but some of the best teachers that I have had throughout my education and that I have observed or encountered here in the city of Baltimore hold an advanced degree (master or doctorate). Therefore how do you weed out the qualified teachers who have a graduate degree from a highly effective teacher who is also qualified that also holds a graduate degree?
To quickly discuss a graduate program for teachers, I think the role of a teacher is pivotal and while taking master level classes better equip us with the knowledge both in theory and practicality, it significantly supports a continuous learning pathway. As a teacher what’s more important, growth or proficient/advanced on a piece of paper? Initially, test scores were not designed to evaluate teachers however standardized test scores are now measuring teacher quality and determining if a teacher is highly effective or not. Once again, we can have a debate on the factors into high stakes test scores but to involve graduate degrees as an element that blames poor test scores seems like a low blow to educational reform.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-d-slekar/deforming-the-graduate-degree_b_881918.html

Charter Schools: Separate and Unequal?

The article “Both Sides Square Off at Hearing on Charter School” describes a current lawsuit in New York City regarding school locations. The United Federation of teachers challenges the NYC Department of Education’s efforts to close 22 existing schools and to use the space for these schools for 18 charter schools. As the article explains, the hearing addresses two issues that continue to exist in the battle for education reform: school closing and the opening and expansion of charter schools. The charter schools depend on these locations for survival.

Generally, those against the charter schools, the union, parents and the N.A.A.C.P. argue that closing local public schools endangers the education of students who remain in the traditional school system, and could lead schools to become “separate and unequal”. They cite examples of ways children in traditional schools have been negatively affected by charter schools, including an example of students who had to use bathrooms that were not on the same floor as their classrooms to accommodate the charter school in their building. Those in favor of the charter schools, including the city, argue that they are simply trying to “get as many students as possible educated with a quality education”.

In many ways, this article was extremely empowering. Watching parents, teachers, community organizations and the government engaged in a debate over education reform demonstrates that people truly believe that this is a battle worth fighting for; that the future of education is important for communities and cities. Active involvement of parents, in addition to teachers and city officials, demonstrates that reforms are being questioned and even challenged, which to me is a positive aspect of the education debate.

However, this article combined with my recent exposure to these kinds of situations (closing existing schools to make room for charters) in the documentary, “The Lottery”, has made me think deeper about the charter school model. It has been so easy for me to see charter schools as one of the key solutions to the problem because the model charter schools, most of the ones we hear about, are successful, efficient, well-lead and generally, a positive experience for the students they serve. Who doesn’t want these opportunities for their child and their student? Furthermore, there is no doubt that charter schools have changed the course of urban education. They have proven to many people that urban schools can be successful and even more importantly, that urban students can achieve.

However, does this mean that charter schools are always the answer? Or even, an aspect of an ideal education system? Should we really have a system in which entry into a lottery determines your education? Is this even fair? What about students who don’t have the parents who know enter them in the lottery at age 5? I was struck by the implications of the statement the challenging lawyer in this case made which suggested that charter schools might be making education “separate and unequal”. This is a hefty charge, but also a striking statement. Aren’t charter schools supposed to be making education more equal? And if they are not, what do we do about it?

Article: "Both Sides Square Off at Hearing on Charter Schools"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/nyregion/both-sides-square-off-at-hearing-on-charter-school-suit.html?_r=1&ref=education

Scantron Scandal

An article today in The Baltimore Sun tackles the sensitive issue of cheating scandals on standardized tests. In the wake of this week’s release of MSA 2011 scores, the buzz about cheating is louder than ever. After the disclosure of several instances of cheating in Baltimore City Schools in past years, Baltimore City Schools CEO Andrés Alonso initiated a reform for increased security during standardized testing. Education officials and critics debate the role of school and teacher assessment based on standardized tests, arguing that the high-stakes of test results drive cheating.

Once again, the issues of teacher accountability and measures of student progress rear their ugly heads. As a “seasoned” teacher, I recognize now the tremendous qualitative growth that takes place in a classroom, and the frustration of not being able to provide hard evidence of this progress. On the other hand, I strongly believe that quantitative growth is critical… at the end of the day, if students can’t pass tests, they won’t graduate. This article contributes to an ongoing, circular debate: teachers must be held accountable, but at what cost? As Diane Ravitch stated in the article, the responsibility aligned to test scores may be more detrimental than inspiring: “They're putting pressure on principals and teachers … to do all the wrong things” (Marbella, 2011, para. 12). I can’t say that I have a solution to this problem, but I do know one thing for sure: student growth needs to be measured by more than just a scantron.

Possible Changes to Disciplinary Codes

On Tuesday, The Maryland State Board of Education delayed any action on proposals to ensure that students who are suspended from school are dealt with fairly and quickly. The proposal would require a superintendent to decide within 10 days whether a student would be expelled or placed on a long-term suspension. However, if the student receives a long-term suspension, the parents have the right to appeal being held out of school during the appeal process.

The state board has been considering changes to the disciplinary codes because of cases in the recent year were students seemed to have been punished harshly for minor incidences, or had no access to schooling while under a long-term suspension. The superintendents’ association and teachers union are opposed to tightening the guidelines on how quickly suspensions are handled because they indicate that, “[T]here are few cases in which students were treated unfairly and prevented from returning to school during an appeal.” Their concern addresses the idea that the guidelines proposed would “burden” local school systems.

As a Baltimore city teacher, my school prides itself on the lack of suspensions and expulsions they approve throughout the year, for better or worse. However, towards the end of the school year, students “received” several suspensions. Parents complained about the “unfairness” and “extreme punishment” their child received, and therefore, suspensions were never followed through. Students began to view suspensions as a joke. Therefore, I can’t relate to how students are treated unfairly during the suspension process because that has never occurred in my school. Suspensions or expulsions are punishments for extreme behaviors, and I agree that they need to be addressed promptly in order to be effective.

Needless to say, the state board decided to proceed with the serious of small changes to how data on superintendents is gathered from local school districts and to change the definition of expulsion.

Just the parents?

In a ‘behind the headlines’ article in the Washington Post, journalists found that recent polling indicates “D.C. school ratings up among system parents, but doubts remain.” In a survey done by the newspaper itself and the Kaiser Family Foundation, 53% of parents with children in the D.C. public school system rated their school as doing a good or excellent job, compared to just 31% in January of 2008.

The survey also shows an increase in Michelle Rhee’s favorable ratings since her resignation. The article offers quotes from parents who say that they used to move their child to schools outside of the city, but now recognize the growth of the school system and where it is headed.

However, the article isn’t all positive: while parents attitudes may look a little sunnier, “the survey found views of the general public are still downright negative in some areas.” Sixty percent of the general public in D.C. rated the schools as “not good” and “poor,” and many suggest that the schools are too risky to send children or do not prepare them for college.

But which opinion matters? I think it is enormously meaningful that the parents who are intimately involved in the system are beginning to recognize the impact of change in D.C. schools. But they aren’t the only people in the city who vote and determine funding for schools or policy-level change. It takes a whole city to embrace change in education for real change to happen. And what would a poll like this look like in Baltimore? Many suggest that Baltimore is a city where the majority of people recognize the changes happening in the school system, but I’d be curious to see the results of a poll like this in Charm City.

Perhaps with the new chancellor of schools, Kaya Henderson, who was unanimously approved Tuesday, the parents and general public will become a more united front. Henderson, once the director of Teach For America DC, is quoted in the article as saying “I think we have come a long way, but we have a long way to go.”

Teach for America's... Private School?

Considering the budget cuts that have sent many of our colleagues scrambling to hiring fairs filled with eager new teachers, seasoned veterans, and fewer and fewer administrators looking to fill vacant spaces, it was interesting to find a blogger on the Baltimore Business Journal looking at where there are teacher positions open. Furthermore, the hiring struggles that incoming corps members will be contending with in the face of budget constraints will inevitably force them to think about alternative placements as well. Regardless, it turns out that some of the top (read: most expensive) private schools are looking for qualified applicants to apply for teaching and administrative positions.

Coming into teaching through TFA, the idea of working at a private school doesn’t even seem to be a possibility. The struggles that our students, schools, and communities face daily are the major reasons for our presence here. It may be strange to think of a high-paying, private school position as a last resort, but for many, that will be the only alternative to looking outside of the city for employment.

(Posted For Jamie Cassermere)

http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/blog/2011/06/baltimore-area-private-schools-are.html?page=all

A Royal Visit to Baltimore

This week Baltimore City received a royal visit by none other than Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, the seventh in line to the British throne. To what do we owe such a surprise? Baltimore is joining 132 countries, 20 states, and our nation's capital in the Duke of Edinburgh's Award-Young American's Challenge. Prince Edward was joined by Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and the 2011 Miss America Teresa Scanlan as he engaged with students with the Living Classrooms Foundation in Fells Point to discuss this new partnership. He commented on how close-knit the community of Baltimore was, and he mentioned, "if we can fit into that family... I think there's a very bright future in Baltimore."

The prince explained in his remarks that he feels as though the city's youth represented what the Duke of Edinburgh's challenge is all about. Their goal is to try and give young people the life skills and experiences they need to change their lives. This visit marks a concrete example of moving forward in such a partnership with Baltimore City Schools. Students from the Crossroads School, a public charter middle school operated by Living Classrooms, had the chance to meet with the prince and engage in conversation about the challenges faced by students in Baltimore City. The award was founded by Prince Edward's father, the Duke of Edinburgh, as a self-development program for youth ages 14-25 that challenges students in community service, physical fitness, and adventure.

I was particularly struck by this article because my school is currently operated by the Living Classrooms Foundation as well. As a turnaround initiative in the city, certain public schools were partnered with non-profits and charter networks to improve school culture and achievement. I have been on field trips through Living Classrooms as well as participated in events they sponsor for our students, so I was excited to hear about this organization working globally as well. An exposure like this to royalty is exciting for our students- and this is a great opportunity for Baltimore City kids. Yet I wonder why sometimes we are continuing to give the funding and resources to those that already seem to have it? Or is this simply because the funds are put to good use and the programs currently in place are strong through those foundations? The Crossroads School is an excellent example of a well-resourced and supported school. Should we be working towards building partnerships for those schools that do not have any current relationships? I'd be interested to hear thoughts from those who do not have any of these partnerships in their current schools.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bs-md-ci-prince-edward-visit-20110621,0,7627562.story

A Khan Invasion

The free website Khan Academy provides lessons on math, chemistry, history, and even GMAT prep. The lessons are in the form of videos and then there are exercises to put what you learned into practice. It's basically an online school for free. You sign in with a google or facebook account.

I told my sixth grade math students about Khan Academy this year. Some of them signed up and loved playing around on it. I like that I can see what skills they are working on and how well they are doing. All the data comes back to me, their coach on the website. If I can wrangle up some computers for my classroom, I would like to include it in my math class as a part of my instruction; that's what some schools in Los Altos, California are doing in this NPR story.

These schools are actually implementing the website as part of their math curriculum. Students are on the computer for a half-hour each day working on the math skills on their level. Some of the fifth graders are multiplying decimals and others are doing high school calculus. If they get stuck, there are videos they can watch to walk them through the math. It's differentiation.

The school from the story seems to have implemented the program well. Students are all working at their level with the teacher monitoring their progress and available for support. Students are also working cooperatively and helping each other. Everyone seems thrilled about the program.

An internet-based curriculum could be education-altering. Why would you need an expert teacher in the room when students have high quality informational videos at their disposal? The data from their time on the computer is all logged and graphed; does there necessarily have to be a highly qualified teacher in the room? It would certainly be cheaper. Mr. Khan even says that his vision is for the teacher to be a mentor or coach while all the students work at their own pace through the material.

Mr. Khan has a big supporter. Bill Gates is loving Khan Academy as evidenced by his video on the website. Khan academy math will be expanding to more schools next year.

Cheating in the City

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bs-md-ci-city-cheating-schools-20110621,0,5931688.story?page=1

In the Baltimore Sun on Thursday a report came out stating that an investigation into several Baltimore City schools has come up with at least two instances of cheating on the MSA. The two schools were Abbottston Elementary and Fort Worthington Elementary. This information comes out of an 18-month investigation of a number of city schools. Two other schools are still under investigation.

It is sad to think that any progress made on the MSA this year by the city as a whole will be overshadowed by these 2 (or possibly more) schools that made a terrible decision to tamper with and alter student tests. At the same time though, it is hard for me to be upset or even mildly surprised by this news. Every single year we read of schools or even entire school districts that try and manipulate the data in their favor. But honestly, can you really blame them?

Well, of course you can, and no, I do not support cheating, and this is certainly not an apology for the principals who were caught. However, it makes me think about what would drive someone to risk their entire professional career to change an 8 year olds test answers. Most principals, I would argue, are very intelligent individuals (although it may not always appear to be the case). And if such an intelligent individual has come to the conclusion that their only hope at keeping his or her job and receiving federal funding next year is to attempt to cheat the system, then maybe the nexus of the problem lies elsewhere…perhaps in the crushing pressure that comes from NCLB and these tests.

Again, in no way am I making excuses for these principals; what they did is atrocious and inexcusable and they deserve whatever punishment they receive, but is this going to be the last time we here of cheating on standardized tests? Not a chance. The fingers will be pointed at the principals (sorry, former principals) of these two schools and the larger problem -- the yolk put on the shoulders of public education by these tests -- will continue on.

Summer Learning—A New School Reform Movement?

http://www.wypr.org/sites/default/files/podcast_audio/midday110620hr2.mp3

I heard a slice of this interview (the link above) on WYPR’s Midday with Dan Rodricks on Monday. The topic is summer leaning loss—the “brain drain,” the “summer slide,” call it what you will. Research shows that our students lose academic ground during the summer if they are not engaged in meaningful learning throughout June, July, and August.

The interview referred to “The Case Against Summer Vacation,” an article published in TIME last July. Much of the data in the article was collected by a group of Hopkins professors, including Marc Stein, who was one of the guests on Midday. In a nutshell, the research found that "while students made similar progress during the school year, regardless of economic status, the better-off kids held steady or continued to make progress during the summer, but disadvantaged students fell back. By the end of grammar school, low-income students had fallen nearly three grade levels behind, and summer was the biggest culprit. By ninth grade, summer learning loss could be blamed for roughly two-thirds of the achievement gap separating income groups.” I find it hard to believe that summer is what causes 67% of the achievement gap in America, but the point is not lost. If our kids are sitting at home doing nothing productive all summer, they are going to fall behind their peers in the suburbs who attend science camps and arts programs and the like.

What I loved about these reports was the type of summer learning promoted. The guests on the show (including Ashley Steward of Baltimore’s Comprehensive Community Initiative to Advance Summer Learning and Monica Logan of the city’s “SuperKids”) promote extremely interactive, project-based, field-based, and FUN-based programs that keep kids sharp and engaged all summer. Summer shouldn’t be for remediation, they say, but for enrichment, and I completely agree.

The problem: how do we get our kids involved? How do we ensure that there are programs enough for all? The show indicated that last summer 16,000 BCPS kids were enrolled in some form of summer program—traditional summer school or enrichment. 16,000 sounds impressive, but that’s only about 20% of the district population. The TIME article posits that effectively selling summer learning as “the opposite of school” could make summer the “season of true educational reform.”

My question…where is the money? And the staff? Should this be City Schools funded? Or should we use this model to network with other organizations to close the achievement gap?

One more issue that was brought up in the interview: should we just extend the school year? Or have more numerous, shorter breaks instead of one long summer vacation? Stein noted that learning loss happens in equal proportions during those shorter breaks. Summer enrichment, then, truly seems the key.

Literacy Goes Green

On Tuesday the Maryland State Board of Education announced a new graduation requirement for Maryland students: “green literacy” (Wheeler, 2011, para. 2). This ruling mandates that all public schools in Maryland expose their students to “conservation, smart growth and the health of our natural world” by integrating these topics into core academic subjects. The requirement will apply to those students beginning high school in the upcoming 2011-2012 academic year. Although no additional funding will be allocated based on this ruling, Maryland may be eligible to receive additional federal funding based on the incorporation of green literacy into the state curriculum.

Initially, I didn’t find this announcement to be too radical. I currently teach fifth grade, and environmental science already exists as one of the six primary curriculum standards I covered with my students. This standard incorporates green literacy objectives related to natural resource use and human impact on the environment. According to the Voluntary State Curriculum, scaffolded variations of these same green literacy topics make up the environmental science standards for Maryland students from first grade through high school.

In actuality, this “new” graduation requirement isn’t revolutionary at all – it simply hasn’t been enforced. I personally support green initiatives and believe they are important issues to address. However, I can’t help but think that high school teachers who are struggling to meet the demands of their current subject area would be overjoyed at the prospect of infusing yet another set of objectives into their curriculums. Until all Maryland students are reading at or above grade level, maybe the focus should remain on literacy… minus the green.

Stop the Blame Game and take some responsibility

On Monday, Maryland voted 13-7 to approve a new teacher evaluation system that bases 50% of a teacher's evaluation on student achievement. While the details are being worked out, I find it notable that every teacher on the panel voted AGAINST this evaluation system. While the Baltimore Sun article does not suggest any reasoning for the strong teacher disapproval, I have a couple ideas.

First of all, perhaps the issue in approving this evaluation system is the same one many teachers had in approving the new contract: its all very vague right now. There's going to be some data from standardized tests, and maybe some projects or portfolios, but nothing definitive yet. I strongly believe that some portion of our teacher evaluation should involve student data, but just as I want to know where a plane is going when I buy a ticket, I want to know exactly how I'm being evaluated before I give my approval. If you don't have a clear plan, I'm not very confident that I should trust you to evaluate me (particularly when my evaluation is linked to my pay).

It seems to me that we should be doing a lot more to get the major players on-board with reforms. By approving a system that teachers (at least those on the panel) cannot get behind, MD is basically saying "we want you to change, because we believe teacher quality is an important factor in increasing student achievement, but we don't really care if you agree or not". Maybe this evaluation system could be a step in the right direction, but failing to get teacher support is skipping a crucial step.

As we've learned in class, real reform requires community support. Teachers have to buy into this! Whether I am evaluated or not, if I don't BELIEVE that the way I teach impacts student performance, I'm not going to work hard to be a better teacher. Consider the standpoint of veteran teachers. If I've been rated proficient every evaluation of a 10+ year career, and every one of those years I've only been able to get a handful of students to score Proficient on a test, how will I react when suddenly that test data is taking MY rating from Proficient to Satisfactory? Will I believe that I've suddenly become a worse teacher? Will I imagine that actually all of these years I was only truly a Satisfactory teacher? Not if you never got me to believe that the way I teach impacts student achievement.

Recent opinion headlines from the Baltimore Sun, such as "Rating Teachers: Parents are the ones who determine student performance" and "Stop blaming teachers for poor student performance" tell us that not only teachers, but community members as well, do not want to see teachers carry this much responsibility for student achievement. Blame the families. Blame the communities. Blame the administration. Blame the unions. Blame the money. Blame the students. No one wants to be blamed for failures (though they're real quick to take credit for successes), and they would all like to blame someone else.

Frankly, it is irresponsible. No ONE part of this mess of a system is to blame-we are ALL responsible. Systematic change is what is needed: a partnership of teachers, students, administrators, families, communities, unions, and funders. If each of us could own up to the part we've played in making some schools successful and others not, we might actually get some real results.

New teacher evaluation program in MD

The Baltimore Sun reported on Monday night that the Maryland Council for Educator Effectiveness has unveiled a new teacher evaluation system for the state that will begin a pilot program in seven counties--including Baltimore City and Baltimore County--starting this fall.  The new evaluation system will rate teachers as highly effective, effective, or ineffective based on their scores in several different areas.  50% of an educator's evaluation will be determined by the principal's assessment of qualitative factors such as classroom environment and lesson plans, much like the evaluation currently used in Baltimore City.  The other 50% of the evaluation will be based on student performance, with 30% based on measures determined by the state (results from three assessments; using state assessments as one indicator, with city benchmarks or student portfolios as other measures) and 20% based on measures determined by the district (also to include student work).  The article mentions that the panel also suggests some alternative options for teachers who do not teach tested subjects, such as submitting videos of musical or dramatic performances. 

This new evaluation system seems promising in that it holds each teacher directly accountable for their students' performance.  It does not matter how well a classroom is organized or how good a teacher's management is if the students are not learning, and this new evaluation attempts to address the issue of student achievement in a way that the current BCPS evaluation system does not.  If increasing student achievement is the goal of the state's public education system--as I believe it should be!--then teachers should certainly be judged on whether or not they are making academic gains in their classrooms. 

However, as with any new system, the question of implementation remains a problematic one.  It is already difficult for some principals to conduct their semi-annual classroom observations in a timely manner, so what will happen when they are expected to look at work portfolios and analyze student achievement data for every teacher?  When the time is found, how can we be sure that principals know what rigorous instruction and student growth looks like in every content area and in every grade level represented at his or her school?  The hope is that all of the state's administrators would be familiar with all of the content taught at their schools, but the reality is that this new evaluation system, if not implemented correctly and carefully, could end up being simply more paperwork that is passed through offices and signed off on by administrators. 

I believe that the proposed new evaluation system is a very good start, and a huge improvement over the current system used in our city schools.  However, there will need to be a lot of oversight on the part of the state--especially during the pilot year--to make sure that principals know how to use the new system, and are prepared to invest the time and resources necessary to make it a worthwhile and accurate measure of teacher effectiveness in the classroom. 

Otis Rolley's Education Plan

Otis Rolley just made a friend.

The mayoral candidate is running on a platform of fixing education in Baltimore, including a list of specific reforms that he is looking for: vouchers for failing middle school students (not a universal voucher system), mayoral control, and the separation of Baltimore's charters from the BCPS LEA.

For a democrat, these are very right-wing ideas. Separating charters from the BCPS LEA means that charter schools in Baltimore would be able to set their own pay scales, separate from the unions (if they chose) and report directly to the state board or parent governing boards. (Note that these are all market reforms, meant to fix the problems of bad incentives that I mentioned in my earlier post.)

Now, I think it's important to note two things: first, there is no panacea in education. Anyone that promises that policy X will change the whole world is nuts. Second, it takes guts to offend the unions at this stage of the game. Either Rolley is foolish, or he is brave. The line between the two is pretty thin.

His suggestions made me think of an interesting question, however. Today, in class, we talked about how CEOs don't need certification programs. It also dawned on me that there is no CEOs union. Each one contracts with a company and sets their own pay.

Thought experiment time: What would happen if every school was its own LEA? If every teacher set their wage with the principal, and contracted individually with them? What if parents ran school governing boards that hired and fired principals and guided school policy?

I don't think that it's a good idea, so if you're thinking I'm crazy, you're missing the point. You can learn a lot from that thought experiment. What would happen if teachers didn't have collective bargaining--but rather, bargained individually? What if principals were accountable directly to parents, and not just to North Ave? Is there a way to make that happen?

In any case, it will be interesting to see how Otis articulates his educational philosophy in the coming months.

Cheating? What Cheating?

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/cheating-what-cheating/2011/06/19/AGp0VwbH_blog.html

The opinion piece “Cheating, What cheating?” by The Washington Post’s education columnist Jay Mathews addresses the issue of cheating on the D.C. Comprehensive Assessment System tests, the tests the District of Columbia uses to evaluate student progress in accordance with No Child Left Behind. Mathews begins his commentary by looking at the data from the Bruce-Monroe Elementary School in Washington, DC, whose test scores declined despite the implementation of a new math program. While the school gave multiple reasons for the decline in scores such as high teacher turnover, lack of funding etc., Mathews suggests that readers consider the first reason that came to his mind: a potential increase in test security at the school. While Mathews does not provide the data of erasure marks on the exams, he does note that the school was flagged in 2009 for having “an above average rate of wrong-to-write erasures”. Generally, Mathews writes that even though we know this is happening in multiple schools and districts, not much is being done to address the problem. He notes that nothing was asked of Kiya Henderson during her confirmation hearings of how she would be handling the cheating scandals. It does not seem to be a mainstream issue of concern. Mathews suggests that failing to look at these issues has significant long term effects, most importantly as to misappropriating resources and attention when it comes to school that really need those things

As a teacher in Baltimore City, I am familiar with stories of similar things happening in our own school district; there are rumors of schools being investigated, administrators being fired and the like. I know that I was required to follow strict procedures at my school after my kids took their Stanford Ten to ensure that the test books were closely monitored at all times. However, what this article really makes me think about is priorities. It seems to me that educational priorities must be seriously out of order if school administrators in any district would rather falsify data, which is both unethical and detrimental to student achievement, than accept and tackle the true realities of their classrooms. We constantly hear about how data is essential to student achievement but has our obsession with numbers become so great that it is an obstacle to true education? We run into this same dilemma when we discuss test preparation or curriculum development along with a state or city level standardized test. There is so much pressure to do well and achieve that in many ways, some of the purpose of education is lost. It seems to me that this loss of purpose can be directly linked to the fact that the policies that exist allow for the focus to be on numbers and measurement, rather than actual student achievement. Thus, while we can each work to fix this in our own classrooms by producing well educated, well-rounded students, our system as a whole cannot foster this whole child education until our testing procedures are adjusted or fundamentally changed. If policies are not changed, we are ultimately failing to recognize and reward many positive things going on in classrooms across the nation and losing much of the potential of what a good education can do for a child.

Bad Incentives

This is a bit long, so forgive me.

I need to give some context to my thoughts; I’ll give it in two pieces of wisdom from my first college econ professor.

1). People respond to incentives.

2). Skewed incentives lead to skewed outcomes.

Parenthetically, these shouldn’t sound groundbreaking—incentives are defined as “that which motivates one to action.” People are motivated by that which motivates them.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

City Schools is riddled with bad incentives (as is education generally). Let me list a few for your perusal and consideration.

1). Schools that suspend too many students for too many years are placed on a “persistently dangerous” list. Instead of leading schools to improve their discipline (by, for example, a tough crack-down on inappropriate behavior) schools are punished for giving consequences. In some cases, I’ve seen administrators issue “off-the-record” consequences, including unofficial ISS or OSS. Other administrators simply stop giving consequences, and let their schools fall into chaos to prevent the perception of a chaotic school.

2). Among my colleagues, City Schools is infamous for promoting people “out” instead of “up.” That is, people are quickly promoted out of the classroom. Network positions, policy positions, governance board, union positions, Hopkins teaching, admin… the list goes on. We are devastatingly good at promoting people out of teaching. In a district that is burdened by high teacher turnover, shouldn’t the incentive be to stay in the classroom?

3). The schools that most need good teachers are the hardest schools to teach in. Those schools have the hardest students, and sometimes have the worst resources, administrators, facilities, and reputations. Worst of all, you are more likely to be punished for lack of student success as a teacher in a hard school than anywhere else. So the best teachers always move to the best schools—even if they stay in the district.

4). I won’t belabor this one—we all know of the incentives regarding failing too many students. If we fail too many kids, a principal will ask us to change their grades, or change them themselves. Worse yet, we get in trouble for holding a high standard if too many kids don’t meet it.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Dr. Alonso seems to believe (as do many people) that the way to fix skewed incentives is by market-oriented reforms. For example, Baltimore's new teacher contract is meant to curb bad behavior by tenured teachers and encourage good teaching across the board. Schools in New York have even eliminated tenure in exchange for more money to emphasize better incentives. Many people who oppose vouchers support fair student funding, which is just vouchers for public schools only. These are all market-based reforms that are meant to alter mismanaged incentives. Are they working? Are market-based reforms the answer?

Magic Word: Hope

Link: Baltimore Brew: Baltimore school and partners kick off renovations and, they hope, a turnaround. 

“The NEW Benjamin Franklin High School @ Masonville Cove. “ This is our anthem, our chant, and our hope. Well over 80 years old, the old Benjamin Franklin Junior High, often referred to as “Ben,” is finally receiving much-needed renovations. I can personally attest to the excitement among the students, faculty, and administration when discussing the new buildings. A media center? A full library? New science labs? It is all going to be there!

However, it should not stop there.  There are far too many dilapidated, outdated, and unhealthy schools throughout the district, and we all know it.  It was rejuvenating to see the ACLU come speak at our school celebration last week; and while many of their comments flew right over my students’ heads, the ACLU’s words stuck with me. Frank Patinella of Maryland’s ACLU stated, “We get emails and calls about schools being closed because of boiler problems and electrical problems. Kids are missing school because of this.” These are only the serious problems. Do not get me started on the lack of heat, air conditioning, or other basics.

My reaction to this article is two-fold. On the one hand, as a teacher at Ben Franklin, I am overjoyed simply thinking about my students walking into our new school next year. They deserve it. However, at the same time, thousands of our kids across Baltimore City will walk into the same buildings they left last year. They deserve better, and if we are serious about reforming our schools, let start with the basics. This is my hope.

Tale of Two Cities Debate

This week in the Baltimore Sun, there has been an interesting debate about the graduation rates in Baltimore and how they correlate with expectations and standards. Last week, there was an editorial (City's Graduation Rates: A success story still being written) about the city's rising graduation rates and the national praise for CEO Dr. Andres Alonso's efforts in Baltimore City Public Schools. Two days later, a letter came in (Baltimore raised graduation rate by lowering the bar) from Paul Evans, a 31 year retired teacher who taught at the high performing Western High School. Evans claimed that the reason Western and, presumably other schools, were seeing higher graduation rates was because North Avenue was refusing high numbers of failing students. According to Evans, when a list of 10+ failing seniors was submitted to North Ave, it was returned with a request to get the number lower. This happened for consecutive years until schools preemptively started lowering the bar, making exceptions or initiating emergency interventions for failing students.

This is a story that almost anyone who has taught in a Baltimore City school can easily believe. The chain of commands often ends with asking teachers to fudge grades, assemble make-up packets, offer extra credit projects or make other exceptions to enable students to pass. I've heard numerous anecdotes of principals asking teachers to change grades if they have too many failing students. Most teachers of integrity will refuse to do so, but it doesn't stop principals from changing grades themselves. Last year, I had 12 7th students who failed at least two core courses. As they predicted, they are all sitting pretty in 8th grade at this moment.

There are many problems with lowering the expectations and fudging grades. However, paramount is the one that Evans points to in his letter: students have caught on. Once students have gotten the message that they're not allowed to fail, it relieves them of all responsibility for their learning. At the end of the quarter, they have come to expect make-up packets. They ask for extra credit after 10 weeks of doing nothing. The work and study habits are abysmal. I remember having a conference with a student during 4th quarter last year. He had not done a lick of work in 2 weeks and my gradebook had a string of goose eggs. I told him if he kept this up, he would undoubtedly fail the grade. He looked at me and said, tauntingly, "Go ahead. I dare you to fail me. I will bet you a million dollars that I go to 8th grade anyway." Of course, he did fail and sure enough he is in an 8th grade uniform today.

In addition to this shift of responsibility, Evans brings up an even scarier point: sometimes, data does lie. If principals and teachers are being pressured - persuaded even - to fudge numbers, make exceptions, lie, and compromise their integrity for the sake of meeting quotas, then what will we learn from this data? What use is it to educators, policymakers or analysts? How can we even begin to make real changes, analyze problems and design systems for intervention if our entire system profile is based on lies?

In order to achieve true reform, Baltimore needs to take a sobering look at the real statistics, identify real problems and start thinking about solutions, rather than trying to sweep everything under an increasingly lower bar.

What kind of relationship should public and parochial schools strive to foster with each other?

What kind of relationship should public and parochial schools strive to foster with each other? On March 17, the Baltimore Sun reported that officials at the Baltimore International Academy – a local charter school – were informed by the archdiocese of Baltimore that they could not purchase the vacant St. Anthony’s of Padua school. The charter school required more space after outgrowing its current facility on the campus of the Maryland School for the Blind. Last year, Archbishop Edwin F. O’Brien closed thirteen schools in the hopes of placing the archdiocese’s remaining schools in a strong financial position. According to archdiocese spokesman Sean Caine, the archdiocese would not sell or lease the property to a charter school because it could weaken other local Catholic schools by attracting families who otherwise would send their children to a parochial school. (Baltimore Sun, http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-03-21/news/bs-ed-catholic-charters-20110321_1_catholic-schools-charter-schools-baltimore-international-academy) This issue begs the question: what sort of a relationship should public and parochial schools strive to foster with each other? Other than the fact that religion informs the curriculum in parochial schools, both public and parochial schools share several of the same goals and, in many cases, serve the same demographic. It seems as though it would be very advantageous for public school leaders to reach out to their parochial school colleagues in an effort to establish some sort of a relationship and potentially share best practices. Education is a business. But every business is comprised of individuals. If these individuals would view each other as colleagues rather than “the competition” then the students in Baltimore, regardless of what school they attend, will reap the benefits.

The Value of Consistency

Lately, I have been thinking a lot about whether or not I should stay at the same school next year or explore new options. I was leaning towards moving on until listening to a panel of charter school teachers and administrators who brought up the value of consistency to the school and the students. If a school is going to truly improve is it important for teachers to stay to give stability and consistency to the kids? How much do the adults matter?

One reason why I think consistency could be important is the improvement I saw in my students behavior when I looped with them to the 8th grade. I didn't get a fresh start with a new group of kids, but the relationships I had built with students made the beginning of the school year fly by. I'm not sure if this would effect students whom I haven't taught, but there is something about knowing adults in the same environment for a period of time.

Another question I have been pondering is whether or not consistency in one classroom can make a difference for students and adults in other areas of the school. For example, I know I feel calm knowing there are adults who have been in the school for a long time to help me if I need it. Just having them there and listening to stories about the school in the past makes me feel like part of a team, motivated to improve the school.

The question that I am left with is: Will staying at my school for a third year ultimately impact my students and their academic success? I don't know how to begin to measure this, but it is a question worth exploring.

Private Lives

Private Lives

In a world where almost anything we want to know is a mouse click away, are those who serve the public entitled to down time? Already we have everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, telling us how to do our jobs of educating children based on personal experiences and “common sense.” As educators we are in a position of power of so many, mainly the children we work with on a daily basis. I am personally afraid to express any real opinions about non-academic topics in my classroom for fear of influencing, or being perceived as influencing, my students one way or the other.

Recent events in the media regarding teacher behavior make me afraid to even post to this academic blog. A teacher in Arizona is fired for refusing to remove a bumper sticker, one of more than sixty that adorned her vehicle. Another is suspended for venting on a private blog about how her students where being lazy by not doing the assigned work. While neither case is black – and – white as far as appropriateness of the circumstances, those we serve need to remember that we are also human. We’ve been encouraged to delete our Facebook and Twitter profiles, avoid public forums, and basically always be the modest school marm of years past.

At what point does it become inappropriate for my students to search for my information? They know where I live because the sale of my house is public record. They know how many traffic tickets I have because that information can be bought. They have found what sorority I am a member of, what awards I won in college, and what I post on Facebook before it became as locked as it currently is. When will we all be punished for saying something or posting something that the wrong person sees? When will we be giving up the right to be something besides a teacher?

Labor Unions for Professionals

Labor Unions for Professionals

There are a lot of younger, new teachers who are NOT part of the BTU, which is apparently causing some concern for the organization. While I am personally not a fan of unions, I wonder why we have a union exactly in this day and age. But that is not the point I wish to make. Instead I will be focusing on the idea of our desire to be treated as white collar professionals while still adhering to a blue collar labor union’s guidelines. If unions have historically been for those persons employed in a physical labor profession, why are there teachers unions? By many we are considered glorified babysitters and others we are the keys to the future. Either way we are seen, we frequently want to be considered in a professional capacity. After all, those of us in these alternative certification programs all went to college and did well in a field outside of education. We excel at traits, such as communication and inner strength and perseverance that have been proven as character traits of successful educators in urban and rural environments. Had we chosen another path after college we would have been negotiating our own salaries and benefits with the Human Resources staff in a “professional” environment – whether that be business, industry, academia, etc. Those personal would have worked with our managers/supervisors to place us appropriately in an allowed range of pay and benefits. We would have been competing in a business model for our jobs and our returns on those jobs. Our job security would have only been as strong as our performance and progress. Instead we chose for whatever personal reasons we all have to enter the classroom in Baltimore City. We still have those same in demand character traits and high quality education, but instead of acting as the professionals we would have been outside the classroom, we hold ourselves back by being considered a labor commodity.

I know I am not a laborer, but a professional. Someday I will be represented as such.

Mediocrity in Education

“Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world… the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.”

This excerpt is from the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, but more than a quarter-century later, the words ring relevant and true as ever as we continue to tolerate, even encourage, mediocrity in educational performance throughout the nation.
In 2002, the Bush administration passed the landmark No Child Left Behind Act, which aimed to close the achievement gap by raising every child to 100 percent proficiency by the year 2014. NCLB is the most ambitious federal education legislation in U.S. history, but heavily criticized for being under-funded and ineffectively implemented. Under the new mandates, every public school in the nation is responsible for meeting annual proficiency targets called Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The most significant flaws of NCLB are that proficiency goals are set at the discretion of states and AYP is determined solely on whether or not a school’s absolute scores reach the required achievement benchmark. Thus, states have incentive to lower the proficiency thresholds and make tests easier so that more students will meet the requisite proficiency levels. This inadvertently creates a perverse “race to the bottom,” which achieves the exact opposite of the goals of NCLB.

The Nation’s Report Card has boasted gains in achievement since the inception of NCLB, but the so-called progress is marginal at best. The reports fail to highlight the fact that a cringe-worthy majority of students still score below proficiency after more than eight years under the new legislation – mostly the poor and minority students for whom NCLB seeks to raise achievement. The National Assessment for Education Progress (NAEP) is currently the only national standardized test that allows for achievement comparisons between states.

Consider the 8th grade Reading scores as a demonstration of the startling lack of literacy progress our students have made in the past 18 years. NAEP classifies the 8th grade reading averages as “significantly different” in 2009 than 1992. On a 0-500 scale, this “significant” difference is between a 260 average in 1992 and a 264 average in 2009. However, this is an apples and oranges comparison to some extent, because testing accommodations were not permitted until 1998. Not surprisingly, the most significant increase in reading averages occurred between 1994 and 1998 – the first year accommodations were permitted – when the averages jumped from 260-264. During the past 11 years, scores dipped to 262 in 2005 and then rose back to 264 in 2009. Effectively, there has been no positive change for 8th grade reading averages since the onset of NCLB in 2002.

When the scores are disaggregated by percentile range, the results are even more shockingly stagnant since 2002. In the 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles, 2009 scores are all equal to the 2002 averages. In the 10th and 25th percentiles, scores are one point lower in 2009 than they were in 2002 after recovering from a dip in 2005.

According to the 2009 results, not a single state or province has reached even 50% proficiency in reading among eighth graders. Connecticut comes closest with 43% at proficient (38%) or advanced (5%) and New Jersey and Massachusetts are close behind with 42% at proficient (37%) or advanced (5%) in each state. Our nation’s capitol ranks lowest with a shameful 12% proficient and 1% advanced. On average, only one third of eighth graders are proficient readers. A statistic with such staggering propensity for economic and social consequences should launch the nation into a flurry of radical reform, but the executive summary headline dispassionately reads, “Reading scores up since 2007 at grade 8 and unchanged at grade 4.”

NCLB’s primary goal is to close the achievement gap that exists along race and class lines. Schools must now disaggregate data for subgroups of students so that low-performing students cannot be masked by averages. NCLB supporters claim that the law has been successful on this account, but close reading of the NAEP report reveals that white students continue to score 20-30 points higher in math and reading. This is the difference between “basic” and “advanced” skills. The discrepancy is equally stark between students who are eligible for free lunch and those who are not. We are still severely failing poor and minority students more than halfway to the 2014 goal.
Aside from the domestic implications of this mediocre performance, the United States falls significantly behind other industrialized nations in math and science. In the 2007 “Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study” (TIMSS), U.S. eighth graders ranked ninth in math and eleventh in science, falling behind China, Hong-Kong, Korea, Singapore, Japan, Russia and England, among others. Our poor performance is especially embarrassing when you consider that we spend more money on education – both in terms of total dollars and per student - than most of these countries combined, with a roughly $500 billion annual education budget. This indicates a severe misallocation of resources in terms of learning outcomes.
Our education system is plagued by mediocrity. As a nation we have collectively ceased to value education as a top priority, indicated by pitifully poor performance, woeful teacher retention and sub-par graduation rates. Aside from being ineffectual, NCLB is also uninspiring in terms of pursuing excellence in education. In more than 600 pages of legislative verbiage, words like “adequacy,” “proficiency,” and “minimum” appear hundreds of time. The world “excellence,” however, is mentioned less than ten times – mostly in the context of ambiguous titles rather than goals or specific recommendations.

Adequacy is not a worthy goal for the future leaders of the world. There is a culture of sufficiency in schools that threatens the prosperity of our nation. In the wake of NCLB, the knee-jerk response in most states was to lower standards to meet achievement levels rather than accepting the challenge to raise achievement to meet tough standards. Our education system fails to encourage life-long learning or the pursuit of academic excellence. Instead, the focus is on checklists of low level thinking standards that are assessed by multiple-choice questions. These skills will not suffice for solving complex global problems like poverty, water shortages, clean energy alternatives, and civil war. If we do not start setting expectations of excellence for our nation’s students, they have no chance of meeting them and they will flounder in the global economy of the 21st century.

The 1983 report prophecies: “History is not kind to idlers… We live among determined, well-educated, and strongly motivated competitors. We compete with them for international standing and markets, not only with products but also with the ideas of our laboratories and neighborhood workshops… Learning is the indispensable investment required for success in the "information age" we are entering.” The tide of mediocrity continues to swell.

Sources:
A Nation At Risk: http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html
Nation's Report Card: The Nation's Report Card - National Assessment of Educational Progress - NAEP

State Board Considers Regulation on Student Discipline

This article by Liz Bowie of the Baltimore Sun discusses a regulation on suspensions in public schools, which was proposed by the state board. This action follows the recent suicide of a student in Virginia who was out on a long suspension. While they do not believe the suspension is the cause of the suicide, they do believe students are out of school for too much time when suspended. The regulation would limit the amount of time a student is out of school, while appealing a suspension or an expulsion. The school districts would like the discipline policy to be left up to them rather than have the state regulate the policies.

Being a Baltimore City teacher I do not agree that discipline policies should be regulated. In the City we have alternative schools that students attend while on long-term suspension or expulsion. I believe there is a need for long-term suspension and expulsion for certain offenses that endanger the safety of students and teachers. I also believe it is a great that the City is able to have alternative schools while children are out on long-term suspension or expulsion. When a student is issued a long-term suspension there is usually a reason and that student should not be allowed back until their suspension is over, or their appeal is complete. If the time out of school is regulated everyone will appeal their suspension so the can return to school earlier. In most cases the students should not be able to return until their suspension is complete.

Source: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-student-discipline-20110322,0,6500829.story

Facebook Fights, MySpace Brawls

According to the 2009 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report, one third of teens report being bullied while at school. Bullying is a critical issue that has potentially detrimental effects on young people. The effects of being bullied are associated with youth developing depression and anxiety, and can even lead to suicide. In many cases, it already has.

In today’s society, bullying has evolved to adapt to the increasingly technological landscape. This is evident in bullying’s most recent form, cyberbullying. Cyberbullying involves using technology to bully or harass another individual by sending threatening, harassing, and/or hurtful pictures or messages. Both traditional bullying and cyberbullying are becoming increasingly prevalent amongst school-aged children. According to bullyingstatistics.org, more than 1 in 3 students have received cyberthreats online. More than 25% of students have been bullied repeatedly through texts or online. The majority of teachers have likely had some experience mediating conflicts between students that were ignited via popular social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace.

In light of recent reports of two students suffering from suicidal thoughts after being repeatedly bullied at Gilmor Elementary school, Chief Executive Officer Dr. Alonso of Baltimore City Public Schools released the following statements: "We have 83,000 kids, and any instance (of bullying) is unacceptable because my goal has been to have 83,000 kids graduate from high school. I don't believe that any single child can be sacrificed." Like Dr. Alonso, I agree that each incidence of bullying is hindering our students’ education and is dampening to their self-esteem. Families, schools, and communities should work in cohesion to address this issue, educate our children about its effects, and develop a solution.

Sources:

http://www.bullyingstatistics.org/content/cyber-bullying-statistics.html

http://www.wbaltv.com/education/23437615/detail.html

Pay Teachers More

Two weeks ago Nicholas Kristof wrote a NEW York Times article about teacher salaries. Kristof argues that teachers do not get paid enough. The article followed public criticism of teachers by several governors. Kristof stated that instead of mocking and demeaning teachers they should pay us more. Good teachers are the most important asset in the classroom and raising student achievement. Kristof sites a study in Los Angeles that found that having a teacher from the top 25 percent for four consecutive years would be enough to close the black-white achievement gap. The effect a teacher has on their students is tremendous and if we want that effect to be positive we need to have the best possible people in the classroom. Kristof argues that in order to have the best people in the classroom salaries for teachers need to be more competitive to other professions, and therefore the need to be higher.

If teachers’ salaries were increased the profession would attract the top college graduates and compete with other professions. In other successful countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Finland, teachers are well respected and compensated. If we want the best teachers to prepare our students to be the best citizens possible we must increase teacher salaries to attract the best possible people to the profession.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/opinion/13kristof.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Pay%20Teachers%20More&st=cse

Single Sex Education-does it really increase student achievement, or is does it just further segregate our students?

Single sex schools and classrooms are a growing trend in education. In 2002, approximately a dozen public schools across the nation offered single sex education and now in 2011, there are over 500 schools that offer this type of innovative education. In Maryland alone, there are 10 public schools that offer some form of single sex education.

The two major arguments in favor of single sex education are centered on differing learning styles between genders and minimizing distractions in the classroom. Opponents of this type of education argue that it further segregates students and goes against feminist views.
Personally, I would rather have students interact with others that are different from themselves including those of opposite genders. I think it’s important for students to learn how to interact with the opposite sex especially if our goal is to prepare them for a co-ed world. I do think for some subjects, such as health education, it is beneficial for students to be separated by sex, but on the whole I think separating the students by gender will only further the gender stereotypes that exist.

What do you think? Do any of you teach at single sex schools? What are the pros and cons that you see?

Teaching to the Text (Message)

Today in the New York Times, there was an article entitled “Teaching to the Text Message.” The author, Andy Selsberg, argues that the research paper and the five-paragraph essay should be rethought in college curricula in favor of shorter, more concise assignments. He talks about the world students live in now – with websites such as eBay, Amazon, Twitter, and YouTube – and how writing longer papers and bibliographies encourages plagiarism and clichés. If students write shorter assignments, they are forced to use accurate and precise language. One comment that struck me in particular was, “The photo caption has never been more vital.” The "photo caption" mentality is prevalent in the internet-driven world we live in today.

As a middle school English teacher, I wonder if I should give more assignments that encourage students to complete shorter tasks that are relevant to them. On the other hand, students need to learn how to read and write in order to be successful in high school and college. When schools develop curricula for different subjects, should they take this into account or should they continue using traditional methods and assignments? My students have little interaction with the internet, so when should they learn how to type and use email? Should these skills be favored over writing longer assignments?

These questions make me wonder what we value in education, specifically in English. Which skills will most benefit our students in their future careers?

Where Should the Money be Spent?

I stumbled upon a study from January of this year that examined more than 9,000 school districts and their spending. The U.S. tops the list of countries based on the amount of money spent per student, yet our test scores do not indicate that our students are competitive. The study suggested (among other things) that HOW money is spent is more important than HOW MUCH money is spent. We saw in class that although the amount of money being spent per pupil is increasing every year, their scores are staying stable. So it is safe to say that “efficiency” in spending, as this study calls it, is the most important factor when discussing high returns on educational investments.

Well, thats easy to understand -- but the question is, what is the best way to spend “efficiently”? The Baltimore Sun recently reported that Baltimore County is spending more money on upper-level administration than most other counties in Maryland. Renee Foose, the new deputy superintendent, will take home $214,000 this year. The county’s teachers and mid-level administrative salaries are ranked far lower. Is this the best way to spend money on education? Baltimore County is a notoriously high-performing county in MD, and perhaps focusing rewarding those in upper-level positions pays off. I would be interested to sift through more data on this issue and see if there is some sort of connection, or if Baltimore County is, in fact, unwisely spending its money.

Sources http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/01/educational_productivity/report.html

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/education/blog/2011/03/baltimore_county_administratio.html