Time to Get Real?

This season's issue of American Educator claims on its cover to have the answers that are needed to provide "Real Support for Really Struggling Schools." The article inside, which is titled, "Get Real," describes five parts of the solution for helping "poor children, their teachers, and their schools." Though none of the ideas are new and the article doesn't actually address how to achieve its suggestions, I did find the plans refreshing in several ways. First of all, everything that the author Antonia Cortese recommended reflects a solid understanding of the necessity to address the basics, such as developing a positive culture of respectful student behavior, early interventions for struggling readers, and allocating enough staff, time, and resources to the neediest schools. She does not try to pretend that the miracle solution will be putting technology in every classroom or shifting the size or composition of classes or investing in high dollar curricula. Instead, she describes realistic circumstances and sticks to the challenges that most need to be addressed.

Another aspect of the article that I appreciated greatly was its attitude towards teachers. Though Cortese did list high quality teachers as its first requirement, she recognizes that it is unreasonable to expect high quality teachers to stay in conditions that make their jobs next to impossible. She also argues that these teachers should be offered incentives and compensation for their work, as well as offered opportunities to advance within the system and take on more responsibilities along the way. To me, these suggestions reflect shifting how we conceptualize teaching and the potential for professional growth without seeking employment in a different field.

The final piece of this article argues that students need a knowledge-rich, grade-by-grade, core curriculum. Cortese points out that students need an enormous amount of background knowledge in order to comprehend more advanced material. She believes that limiting or cutting out completely the time dedicated to science, social studies, and the arts is detrimental to students even if the time is used for increasing reading and math skills. I absolutely agree with Cortese, which might reflect my bias as a high school social studies teacher, but I genuinely believe that children need to have instruction in a wide variety of disciplines from the beginning of their education. I am constantly shocked at what my students do not know. The majority of my students come to my class not knowing even basic geography or history. I have 16 year olds who cannot name the 7 continents, let alone place them on a map. They do not know that there are 50 states in the U.S. They do not know that Native Americans lived here before the pilgrims came. They do not know that the North defeated the South in the Civil War, nor do they know why the two sides were fighting. I would imagine that science teachers face the same basic deficiencies in prior knowledge. I understand the need for remediation in reading or in math, but I also believe that if it is at the expense of science and social studies instruction, ultimately, the child will be put at a severe disadvantage in his or her future studies.

Even if everyone could agree on what is needed to support low-income schools, which I recognize is a huge "if," the real obstacle to improvement is facilitating those solutions. Every one of Cortese's suggestions would take significant resources, both financial and human, and she recognizes that carrying out her plan would take a huge commitment. When listing the people that would need to cooperate, Cortese includes everyone from parents to the President. Despite the challenges and despite the costs, I believe that Cortese is on the right track.