It is no mystery to the American
public that the majority of our school systems are in dire need of change,
particularly in the lower-income school districts across the nation.
Unfortunately, there is much less agreement surrounding how to solve the
growing achievement gap among American students as well as between American
students and the rest of the world. There is evidence of successful reforms,
demonstrated by KIPP and the Harlem Children’s Zone, but until we learn how to
implement effective reform strategies and procedures on a larger-scale, we are
continuing to allow our lower-income students fall farther and father behind
their wealthier peers and the global community.
While politicians and educators
continue to hash out ideas and argue over what may or may not work, we need to
remember the students for which we are reforming schools and recognize that
they are continuing to suffer as we brainstorm and develop long-term,
large-scale reform strategies. In the meantime, perhaps we should begin
considering some more superficial and short-term changes to supplement and
support our students’ learning. Some of these quick fix repairs are
implementable on a larger-scale and may ensure a higher quality education, even
if just for a brief time. Even if such superficial changes are not meant for
the long-term, there is no reason not to utilize them to ensure our current
students receive a better education.
A recent article, published by
Education News, considers alternative methods to academic success implemented by
two schools in Guilford County, NC. In the past year, both schools demonstrated
significant gains in standardized test scores, but they attribute their
progress to resources outside of the school district.
Montlieu Academy attributes their
success in the past year to their incorporation of technology into the school
experience. Nearly every member of the school has access to iPads, which they
use to enhance instruction and learning, and were leased thanks to the help of
several grants. What makes this approach even more exceptional is that it has
done more than raise test scores. The school’s iPad program has rejuvenated
teachers and students alike, increasing enthusiasm and investment in the school
community. The interactive learning tools have students actually excited to
come to school. Of course, the novelty of technology may wear off in the years
to come, particularly if it becomes the norm in modern classrooms; however,
technology can provide at least a short-term solution to enhance student
learning as well as motivate students to come to school and work hard in a
setting that is less boring and more intellectually stimulating.
Wiley Elementary attributes their
successful year to expanding the school day, rewarding teacher achievement, and
implementing gender separation in the classroom. While all of these changes
likely helped improve student success, the school focuses on the value of
gender separation, which is becomingly increasing popular in American schools
despite resistance from organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union.
At Wiley, boys and girls receive the same instruction but in slightly different
learning environments. Middleton Heights Elementary School went as far as to
painting the rooms different colors for boys and girls. There is still little
research that demonstrates just how effective gender separation is in our
schools; however, this is a minor change that could enhance the quality of
education for our students in the meantime.
It
is important to remember the difference between long- and short-term solutions.
Strategies, such as technology use and gender separation, are not long-term solutions;
they are merely band-aids that may help enhance the quality of our students’
education until we develop a long-term, large-scale approach to education
reform. As long as people remember that these quick fixes are only meant to
enhance educational experiences and not revolutionize them, and it is
understood that these will not fix our school systems but help support our
current students for the time being, I think there could be value in
considering some superficial changes that are easy to implement on a large
scale. It may be quite some time, if ever, that we develop a reform that can be
applied on a larger scale, but until we achieve this, we should not continue to
neglect the opportunities to enrich the educational experience of our current
students.
http://www.educationnews.org/k-12-schools/schools-take-different-path-towards-academic-success/
http://www.digtriad.com/news/education/article/235973/165/Technology-Helps-Boost-Test-Results-At-Triad-School
http://www.educationnews.org/k-12-schools/number-of-single-sex-classrooms-growing/
2 comments:
It's quite clear that the "band-aids" approach worked very well for these schools in particular, so I wonder if large-scale educational reform is actually appropriate for these two schools in particular. Maybe they can do well by simply continuing with band-aid reforms as necessary, just changing the style of the band-aids from technology and single-sex classrooms to some other ideas that seem like they would work in this particular setting.
To take the medical analogy a little bit further, perhaps we should be thinking of our schools and unique patients with different "medical" histories and "symptoms." In the medical profession, it is obvious that doctors look at differentiating factors before making diagnoses and prescribing procedures, but for some reason, educational reforms have not been treated in this way. A reform that has worked in one area might be worth test-piloting in a different area, but it seems like the reality is that there large-scale implementation is common (and sometimes rushed through). Policymakers and reformers have many different options available to them, and it might be time that they start using them in the same way that a doctor would treat patients: based on the conditions of the school, its history and environment, and conversations with the school community, decision makers should prescribe reforms on an individual school level. This way, we could carried out complicated procedures, but without subjecting the schools that just need a band-aid or two to the same procedure.
This is Drew Indorf.
I like the effort to distinguish between short- and long-term reform initiatives. For some schools, perhaps a tweak in technology or a adjustment in scheduling could be the difference between failure and success. The fact that these schools attribute their large growth to such small changes supports Brian's extended metaphor of school systems as patients and the federal reform efforts as doctors. Sometimes, as was the case with Montlieu Academy and Wiley, the small change was the right change to make - even if it was just a "bandaid." In other cases, the appropriate prescription may be a larger, more invasive procedure including reforms to the district's structure or curriculum. However, prescribing the entire nation with one solution assumes that all districts have the same problems. As Brian mentioned, this certainly is not the case. Additionally, prescribing a generic to the entire population of schools is an irresponsible use of federal funds and human energy. We can save money, save time on professional development, and build more effective programs by figuring out when a school needs a bandaid and when a school needs major surgery.
So let me summarize and echo a strong point you each made: short- and long-term reforms vary in type and necessity, and should be implemented as needed on a school-wide or district-wide basis.
Post a Comment