Developing a Point of View on Closing the Achievement Gap
As someone constantly on the lookout for examples of the 80/20 principle, I immediately tuned into an assertion made by Robert Balfanz and Nettie Legters in their Education Week “Commentary” (“Closing ‘Dropout Factories’: The Graduation Rate Crisis We Know, What Can Be Done About It,” July 12, 2006) that just 15 percent of American high schools produce close to half of this nation’s dropouts (we might call this the 50/15 principle). They also claimed that “poverty is the fundamental driver of low graduation rates” with a near perfect correlation between it and schools’ tendency to loose students between the 9th and 12th grade. Research the authors have conducted indicates that half of one large school district’s dropouts could be predicted in the 6th grade through just four variables: attendance, behavior, and course failure in math and English. Among the concrete solutions Balfanz and Legters offer is “greater investment in research, development, and invention . . ., particularly in the areas of curriculum, instruction, and assessment.”
I would add to the researchers’ list of solutions the development of an unshakable belief on the part of system leaders regarding the capacity of all (or virtually all) students to learn at high levels. That thought was underscored when I met this summer with a group of 15-20 rural and small system superintendents and other district administrators who were discussing in a very open and honest way whether schools can be expected to educate all students to the level of their state’s rigorous academic standards.
Speaking in the context of NCLB, a superintendent in the group said that a goal that put higher levels of achievement many years out in the future was unacceptable to him; he believed his school system could do much better job of educating all its students right now and that it was his job to ensure that it happened. Another superintendent took exception with that view, a position that probably took some courage to express openly in such a public setting. He said, in effect, that based on his experience poverty trumped the influence of schools in determining student achievement. The two superintendents talked back and forth for a few minutes, with others joining the conversation from time to time.
After the session the doubting superintendent followed me down the hall, clearly wanting to continue this discussion and to further explore my views. We stopped to talk, and another participant who had not spoken in the larger group joined us. It was clear to me that both superintendents were looking for an honest, respectful, and thoughtful conversation about schools’ responsibilities and capacities to close the achievement gap given the existence of serious social problems such as poverty and racism.
I, too, have struggled to develop a coherent point of view on this critically important subject, and the following essay I prepared for the Fall 2006 issue of the JSD reveals how I have tried to clarify my own thinking in this area. (The published “Overview” will be somewhat briefer due to space restrictions.) I hope that it is useful to you and to others in stimulating serious and sustained dialogue regarding this issue.
“Create Your Point of View Regarding Schools’ Capacity to Close the Achievement Gap”To be honest, I feel angry that our society asks teachers to take on a disproportionate share of the responsibility for ameliorating the profound negative consequences of poverty, racism, and inadequate health care for poor and minority children. I am angry that the public schools that serve our most challenged students are grossly underfunded. And I am angry at political leaders who willfully ignore the damage done to children by these social problems or who act in self-serving ways that intensify the problems.At the same time, I know that each day hundreds of thousands of teachers make a positive difference in the lives of young people who are challenged by forces far beyond their control. These teachers know first hand the grinding circumstances that some children face and yet persist day after day in the demanding task of teaching all student to high standards.This issue of the JSD challenges me to reconcile these perspectives by determining my point of view regarding the capacity of schools to close the achievement gap. Here’s the result of my effort.
Competent, firm leadership by knowledgeable, skillful, and committed principals and teacher leaders is essential in creating schools in which all students achieve at higher levels. While such leadership cannot be abdicated by principals, in high-performing schools it is distributed broadly within the school community.
Most human beings—educators included—underestimate their ability to affect positive change. Skillful leadership on the part of principals and teachers can create a sense of expanded possibility and higher expectations for everyone in the school community—teachers, principals, students, and family members. This increased sense of efficacy leads to more ambitious goals, improved teaching, and the development of school programs that address equity issues.Teachers’ deep understanding of the content they teach matters. So, too, does their knowledge of instructional practices that produce high levels of learning for a diverse student population.
Teachers’ attitudes toward their students affects motivation and learning. Positive attitudes are revealed in the high expectations teachers hold for students and for one another, in the genuine respect they display for students and their families, and in the enthusiasm and sense of possibility they bring to their work each day.
The quality of relationships teachers have with one another affects whether professional learning is put into practice and whether other school improvement resources are wisely used. Trust among teachers as revealed in candid conversation about traditionally “undiscussables” such as race and social privilege is a critically important feature of high-performing schools that serve poor and minority students.
All the factors mentioned above can be affected through persistent, deliberate effort. Closing the achievement gap, as this issue of the JSD makes clear, requires steadiness of purpose in the face of what at times may feel like insurmountable challenges. It also requires professional learning and teamwork that has its heart sustained and candid conversations within the school community about learning, teaching, relationships, expectations, race, and poverty.While the exercise of preparing this “Overview” helped me clarify my views, it is your perspective as school and system leaders that will ultimately influence the life chances of poor and minority students. I hope that you use the articles found in these pages to help you articulate your point of view regarding the responsibilities and capacities of schools to educate all students to high standards. It is a critically important task that no one—article authors, publication editors, or education associations—can do for you.
I would add to the researchers’ list of solutions the development of an unshakable belief on the part of system leaders regarding the capacity of all (or virtually all) students to learn at high levels. That thought was underscored when I met this summer with a group of 15-20 rural and small system superintendents and other district administrators who were discussing in a very open and honest way whether schools can be expected to educate all students to the level of their state’s rigorous academic standards.
Speaking in the context of NCLB, a superintendent in the group said that a goal that put higher levels of achievement many years out in the future was unacceptable to him; he believed his school system could do much better job of educating all its students right now and that it was his job to ensure that it happened. Another superintendent took exception with that view, a position that probably took some courage to express openly in such a public setting. He said, in effect, that based on his experience poverty trumped the influence of schools in determining student achievement. The two superintendents talked back and forth for a few minutes, with others joining the conversation from time to time.
After the session the doubting superintendent followed me down the hall, clearly wanting to continue this discussion and to further explore my views. We stopped to talk, and another participant who had not spoken in the larger group joined us. It was clear to me that both superintendents were looking for an honest, respectful, and thoughtful conversation about schools’ responsibilities and capacities to close the achievement gap given the existence of serious social problems such as poverty and racism.
I, too, have struggled to develop a coherent point of view on this critically important subject, and the following essay I prepared for the Fall 2006 issue of the JSD reveals how I have tried to clarify my own thinking in this area. (The published “Overview” will be somewhat briefer due to space restrictions.) I hope that it is useful to you and to others in stimulating serious and sustained dialogue regarding this issue.
“Create Your Point of View Regarding Schools’ Capacity to Close the Achievement Gap”To be honest, I feel angry that our society asks teachers to take on a disproportionate share of the responsibility for ameliorating the profound negative consequences of poverty, racism, and inadequate health care for poor and minority children. I am angry that the public schools that serve our most challenged students are grossly underfunded. And I am angry at political leaders who willfully ignore the damage done to children by these social problems or who act in self-serving ways that intensify the problems.At the same time, I know that each day hundreds of thousands of teachers make a positive difference in the lives of young people who are challenged by forces far beyond their control. These teachers know first hand the grinding circumstances that some children face and yet persist day after day in the demanding task of teaching all student to high standards.This issue of the JSD challenges me to reconcile these perspectives by determining my point of view regarding the capacity of schools to close the achievement gap. Here’s the result of my effort.
Competent, firm leadership by knowledgeable, skillful, and committed principals and teacher leaders is essential in creating schools in which all students achieve at higher levels. While such leadership cannot be abdicated by principals, in high-performing schools it is distributed broadly within the school community.
Most human beings—educators included—underestimate their ability to affect positive change. Skillful leadership on the part of principals and teachers can create a sense of expanded possibility and higher expectations for everyone in the school community—teachers, principals, students, and family members. This increased sense of efficacy leads to more ambitious goals, improved teaching, and the development of school programs that address equity issues.Teachers’ deep understanding of the content they teach matters. So, too, does their knowledge of instructional practices that produce high levels of learning for a diverse student population.
Teachers’ attitudes toward their students affects motivation and learning. Positive attitudes are revealed in the high expectations teachers hold for students and for one another, in the genuine respect they display for students and their families, and in the enthusiasm and sense of possibility they bring to their work each day.
The quality of relationships teachers have with one another affects whether professional learning is put into practice and whether other school improvement resources are wisely used. Trust among teachers as revealed in candid conversation about traditionally “undiscussables” such as race and social privilege is a critically important feature of high-performing schools that serve poor and minority students.
All the factors mentioned above can be affected through persistent, deliberate effort. Closing the achievement gap, as this issue of the JSD makes clear, requires steadiness of purpose in the face of what at times may feel like insurmountable challenges. It also requires professional learning and teamwork that has its heart sustained and candid conversations within the school community about learning, teaching, relationships, expectations, race, and poverty.While the exercise of preparing this “Overview” helped me clarify my views, it is your perspective as school and system leaders that will ultimately influence the life chances of poor and minority students. I hope that you use the articles found in these pages to help you articulate your point of view regarding the responsibilities and capacities of schools to educate all students to high standards. It is a critically important task that no one—article authors, publication editors, or education associations—can do for you.
posted by Dennis Sparks at 1:23 PM
24 Comments:
Dennis, in a brilliant post, wrote:
Most human beings—educators included—underestimate their ability to affect positive change. Skillful leadership on the part of principals and teachers can create a sense of expanded possibility and higher expectations for everyone in the school community—teachers, principals, students, and family members. This increased sense of efficacy leads to more ambitious goals, improved teaching, and the development of school programs that address equity issues.
Question for everyone:
Do you think that the scripted curricula that have made such stark inroads into high needs schools have led to teachers' underestimating their own ability to make a meaningful difference?
What message do districts send to teachers when they require adherence to a script?
I worry that scripted curricula in high needs schools lead teachers to a point where not only are they unsure of their own decision-making ability but they don't even truly try to make decisions---or accept responsibility for results.
If their students don't succeed, they have a measure of deniability---"I followed the script."
Any thoughts?
Bill
Bill, I do think you are right. "Scripted" curricula leads teachers to dependency and low levels of efficacy. When the teachers in our system write curriculum, I am constantly reminding them to keep it simple. Curricula ought to be a list of the learning outcomes...what our students will know at the end of the course or grade level. Leave the lesson planning and design (the magic of teaching!) to the classroom teacher. Unfortunately, many of our folks have grown up in an era of "teacher proof" materials (a term used by textbook publishers meant to imply "anyone can teach this content if they simply follow the book"). Such thinking cuts the heart right out of teaching.
School leaders must foster the flames of innovation in the classroom, while holding folks to common learning outcomes. Afterall, as the Effective Schools guru Ron Edmonds once said, "a school must be more than a string of classrooms connected by a common parking lot."
You make an excellent point about scripted curriculum, Mike. But I would also posit that part of that insecurity comes from what is at stake if our students don't do well. Many work in school districts that threaten the loss of our jobs if test scores and achievement don't improve. I would imagine that, especially for a new teacher, the idea that if we don't do everything exactly right, we might be out of a job is enough to make anyone less confident.
I agree with Mike's point. Textbook companies make the assertion about materials being "teacher proof" not thinking about the fact that students that achieve at the highest levels usually have motivated creative teachers that make learning fun. Teaching is about "heart" not a test. Testing is necessary and needed, but at what cost?
I believe that testing is important, but I also believe that too much emphasis is placed on the test scores. In my district, 8th graders take four 2-hour tests, for four days in a row. There are so many factors that can affect a fourteen year old student and how they approach each one of these tests. It's hard for me to believe that each student is going to do as well on the test on Monday as they do on Thursday, regardless of what the subject area is.
The shocking statistic Dennis refers to as “the 50/15 principle” is a sad commentary on the failure of public education to meet the needs of our most needy students. I teach in an economically and culturally diverse suburban school system. To be honest discipline is not my forte and I always assumed I wouldn’t be successful in an urban setting. In my own school system I see how strongly the expectations of family and culture are internalized by the students. Poverty and the hopelessness, substance abuse, destructive behaviors and mental illness it can cause, leaves many students too devastated to envision the very real prospect of a better life for themselves. They look around and see the pattern repeated over and over again. How can we help these kids who feel that nothing they accomplish in school will make a real difference in their lives?
I agree with Dennis that this "scripted curricula" is leading teachers to lose faith in their abilities and their power. Schools are depending more and more on basal type programs for reading and math, so much so that they are rushing to get through each scripted verse of the curriculum without taking the time to factor in student interest and needs. Teaching has become a process of "getting through" this scripted verse rather than finding creative ways to develop and increase student learning. In order to increase their teaching abilities (which will consequently increase student scores on standardized tests)teachers need to be empowered.
I don't know if "scripted curricula" is leading teachers to "loose faith in their abilities," but I do think it stifles creativity and our innate sense of what the learner needs. In my state a third grader cannot go on to fourth grade if they do not pass the reading portion of the test. Teachers have incredible pressure from parents and administrators. If we "know" our students, we need the freedom to teach them. However, some feel much safer following the script. I also think that scripted curriculum can lead to lazy planning.
I agree when I was a student teacher my cooperating teacher used a scripted curriculum. His daily teaching consisted of playing solitaire on his computer.
As an elementary teacher, I am expected to teach all subjects, be an expert in all of them, prepare students for standarized testing, and serve on a committee to write curriculum. I loved what Mike said about writing curriculum-list the learning outcomes and leave the lesson planning and design to the 'magic of teaching' to the classroom teacher.I can see some use of scripted curriculum for the novice teacher, but I personally think that it is too confinining for teachers who are moving forward on the continuum of teacher development. Teaching is an art. I wish we were given the freedom to teach like we were in the 'good old days'!
As many of us are well aware, being a teacher has shifted from a "craft" to a "science." Textbook companies clearly use this aspect to market their books. One thing to consider is that most states have some sort of alternative certification programs. This is used for the career changer and can be helpful in very large school systems where teachers are needed the most.
I can remember Summer Bridge Programs in Chicago. There was a text that was scripted for the teacher. The students that probably needed the most human interaction from a teacher were receiving a versed, step by step phrase for their daily lesson.
Not only is this dishearting for struggling students, but also for the student that have different learning styles.
What do we do with those students that require much more? Are their scripts that are modified? (note the sarcasm)
With the use of scripted textbooks where does that leave collaboration? Most expert teachers have arrived at a point of expertise through becoming expert communicators with other professional colleagues. The most learning takes place when teachers are willing to work together to come up with the creative ideas to encourage learning for all students. How can we encourage collaboration when acting in a daily play role-playing as the teacher?
I really enjoyed reading your article. The position that educators are put in today is very confusing. On one hand you have to address the educational standards that are policy driven, on the other deal with the lack of money and resources. All of this is intensified by the fact that the school has become not only a center for education, but also carries the burden of all social ills. Society depends on the teacher and administrators to not only play the roles of educators, but also sociologists, counselors, mediators, and community leaders. A tough task, however most of us know that there isn't any other profession that fits them as well as education.
I too believe that one individual can make a difference and affect change. It is tragic that the most gifted teachers are not rewarded for this gift or their "art". It takes a truly gifted teacher to reach into an inner-city classroom and turn those students on to learning.
Scripted Curriculum
In my personal experience, I have found that implementing a scripted curriculum is great for novice to competent teachers. After implementing the curriculum for the first two years and attending solid staff development offered by the publisher during the summer, I became proficient at teaching reading to my 2nd grade students. I gained so much confidence in myself that by the third year, I was able to implement this curriculum without the script and make my own choices for supplementing what was lacking or enhancing what it offered. Novice teachers as well as competent teachers need the assistance which a scripted curriculum provides. Let’s face it, universities can not teach everything a teacher needs to know to be effective; effectiveness is attained through experience and further staff development. Yes, I am all for scripted curricula.
I teach at the elementary level. I teach in a suburban district that is relatively well off. As I read the article NCLB and 2014 was all I could think of. I also want to know how do I educate the student who has a low IQ, or a poor home environment? I have received notes from parents telling me it is my job to teach not their job. So they send in homework not completed. The student is not prepared for school. They have not had a good night's sleep, or at times have not had a meal.
I believe I have a positive attitude but at times you are totally drained by the standards we are held up to. I am expected to turn the negative side of society into a positive results like advanced on a test. When students and families are worried about filling their basic needs they can't see the importance of an education at the moment.
I don't care for the "scripted" material. It does not lend itself to the teachable moment. I don't have time to share or expand on many discussions because I have to be on page 23 by third day of school. I resent the notion that as a professional I am not competent to us e the curriculum as a guide. How are we closing the gap? The more scripted the more testing. I spent the first three days giving benchmark test in reading and math. I won't even mention the weekly tests.
How disheartening to need to discuss such difficult topics. It is a shame that education is faced with such insurmountable challenges, yet encouraging that so many of us still choose to be educators. I do not support standardized testing to the degree it is currently being used, but it seems to have been a necessary cop-out in the face of wide-spread student apathy. How many times I have heard, “is this for a grade” until I wonder what I could possibly get students to do just for the sake of learning or experience. I admit I was an over achiever, always seeking the A’s rather than being concerned with the experience, but I did in fact learn and no one had to beg me. Issues in society are giving students, and even adults, an easy way out. They somehow get thrust into a life of survival because of generations of poor choices (indirectly resulting from nation-wide political and social problems like gangs, drugs, and even the “American Dream”) and lose sight of education as a way out. It seems to be the last priority since there are other ways to make money. And isn’t that all it’s about? Making money? Hardly, yet education is not respected or even pursued as anything more than a requirement by so many. Knowing that, I suppose *requiring them to perform on a standardized test leaves out the necessity of its importance. Unfortunately, important or not, accurate or not, necessary or not, it is “leaving children behind.”
I personally don't care much for scripted curriculum but do understand why some schools are stressing its use as standards and testing sit like a heavy weight on many a teacher's/administrator's/community's conscience.
For me, designing and implementing my own curriculum affords me the opportunity to not only learn and know my content area better, but also to custom-gear what I teach to my students' needs. I like to consider myself a fairly creative teacher and a pre-made unit does not allow much for this.
I do agree that all students have the capability to learn but I also agree with the comment mentioned by one of the meeting's superintendents where he or she stated that the larger social problems of poverty and racism might be larger than what our current school system can handle. While I will continue to do everything in my power to enact positive social change, something fundamentally wrong in our society must be fixed and school cannot do this on their own.
Scripted curricula? Seems to me that everything is scripted which means to me that anyone can come in and pick up from where I left off and teach...This is NOT the case but that is what lack of vision and a week curricula get you.
A teacher's guide should be just that, a guide. You should not be lost if it isn't glued to your arm. Teachers are responsible for being knowledgeable enough in their craft that not just anyone can walk in a do their job. In addition to following a guide, a teacher should have enough freedom to supplement the lesson or unit in a variety of ways that make the content accessible to all students.
As a teacher of severely disabled children and a former LD teacher, I believe I have the authority to state that content can be accessible to all students in some way. I feel indignant and underminded as a special educator when someone that hasn't worked with the special needs population of learners with exceptional differences states that "all students can learn" such-and-such material. This is not the case. However, all students can be held to higher expectations and achieve more than we often give them credit for.
I believe the scripted curriculum enables a novice teacher to show their creativity. At my school my kindergarten colleagues came together to discuss our insight on the reading series after using it for two years. We all believed that the reading series was not setting high expectations for our students. If the curriculum a district chooses is supposed to be the best for the students why do not they get classroom teachers advice before choosing it. After my first two years of teaching, I noticed my students did not seem engaged during my reading lessons. At that time, I was going by the curriculum word from word, because the vp handed me the book and told me to use it for my lessons. After my first two years teaching, I had to reevaluate myself, by changing my lessons and not sticking to the book as if it was a bible. I started to tweak the lessons so my students can make connections with their own lives. Once I changed the lessons, I noticed my students were more engaged than the students I taught the previous year. My students test scores also went up. I hope that most teachers will realize they don't have to stick to the book and they can change the lessons according to their students needs and engagement.
I wonder if we all have the same definition of "scripted curricula". I worked from a scripted math curriculum called SAXON, but did not feel stifled in my ability to be creative above and beyond what the script offered. I think that SAXON offered a script so that across grade levels we were using much of the same vocabulary and teaching processes which allowed students and parents have a sense of predictability in daily homework and assessment. I felt more empowered by that program than my new math curriculum which has so many pieces that I have trouble locating what I need when I need it.
I think "scripted curricula" can be meaningful and useful if teachers are allowed to make decisions on how to meet the needs of their class and not necessary have strict adherence to every piece of the script.
Good discussion everyone.
I think I see both sides of the coin. On the one hand scripted curricula could be very helpful to teachers, especially young ones who need direction. However, on the other hand, I tend to see it as a tool that encourages laziness. Some teachers use this as an excuse to ‘put their brains to rest.’
Teachers are to be innovative creative minds who are constantly looking for ways to inspire and motivate their students. These teachers may use a ‘script’ but they are intuitive enough to know when to make modifications to the ‘script’ so that their students can get the most out of a learning experience. Additionally, these teachers don’t tie themselves to a test. They realize that they are training minds of students who should grow up to be functional members of society and thus their lessons should be meaningful.
Speaking from experience, our students enjoy and appreciate our classes more when they know that their teachers are flexible and are teaching content that has relevance in the real world. This may mean stopping a lesson to deal with an important issue, but in the long run it is all worth it because our students end up being better human beings.
I have taught in both urban and suburban schools, and I do not believe scripted curricula should be used be teachers, it is an insult to us. It hard enough teaching sometimes. By having a script, they take away the personal experience, and creativity. I work in telemarketing as a teen, I had a script, anyone could read it, Does that mean that any one can be a teacher because they have a script, with no creditials. It takes away from our profession and the kids.
Post a Comment
<< Home