We hear it all the time, especially during election years. We need to reform education.
Maybe we do need to make some changes. Maybe we need to move backwards and away from some of the reforms already initiated. Maybe we need to completely rethink the way we educate our children. Maybe we need to stand firm and keep what we have. Maybe we need to take the stand that yes, there is lots we need to do, or could do, but we simply do not have the resources to get the job done in the way it needs. If so, say it.
In this blog you will find a links to three YouTube posts that reflect some thoughts regarding school reform. One of them refers to "elephants in the room" when we talk about school reform. Does his ideas create any thoughts with you individually and collectively? All three posts are self explanatory.
Watching these short videos brings to my mind the work of Ruby Payne. If you are not familiar with her wort I feel it is worth you while. In this age of seemingly endless criticism of public education I feel it is worth all educators time and effort to become familiar with her work.
But for now, sit back, grab a drink and see if you see the elephants the gentleman in the first video is referring too. And while you are at it see if you see others he may have missed. There are two other videos posted as well that may spur thought. You will also notice that YouTube will list related videos that may be of interest. I do not necessarily endorse any of the videos, or the thoughts embedded within them, but I do feel many of them are worthy of consideration and discussion.
Anyway, here are the links for this blog:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uMAe2U7zdw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyZhK2Wc_Q&feature=related
Now, where did I put those peanuts?
24 comments:
Politics always seems to be the root of all issues. My school was the last school in our county to become Title 1, so we were the last school to get federal money. I have a problem when people think that just because you are in poverty you are at higher risk of failing so we must help these students to succeed. I have found that the students that come from the poorest homes are the ones that try the hardest. They take nothing for granted.
I just finished watching the u-tube video with Mr. Fryer. I totally agree with his comments about the education system ignoring the 2 elephants in the room (poverty & adequatte education). Personally, I have heard so many parents and older teachers say "we need to go back and teach the bacis again". WE CAN'T!!!! That would not benefit a child in the 21st century. We need to incorporate technology into every class(to me, an overhead projector and VCR does NOT count as technology).
Also, I am really concerned about this so called "factory education" where we put all children onto the same pathway. This will not work!!! How can a low functioning ELL child complete the same pathway as an honors child?
I also want to comment on the elephant of poverty. It is hard to teach a group of students who come from poverty, lower-class, middle-class, and upper-class. Even after poverty training, it is still a challenge in the classroom. I teach in the CTE department, so I always have a very diverse student population. Any suggestions???
HALLELUJAH! Someone who is finally admitting to the fact that there is not a one size fits all for education. I am new to the world of research about mulitple intelligences but even I realized that all children do not learn the same. When I was in the classroom I stopped just short of teaching upside down in order to reach some of my students.
As for the bigger elephant, poverty, I have often been very concerned about our Equity Plus schools. I am not quite convinced that we have the best teachers set up in these schools. We provide a bonus check to teachers who teach in these settings to "convince" them to stay, but I have a feeling that some are sticking around just because of the extra check on the 15th of Dec. and May. I agree with Dawn that sometimes our expectation is lowered for students of poverty when in fact it should be the same. If they can't or haven't had the opportunity to experience the world then its our job as educators to bring the world to them. Thats why some genius thought of Discovery Education and why SciWorks has a mobile field trip.
Elephants in the room...my concern is that everyone seems to know that there are elephants, but no one seems to know what to do about them! I agree with Fryer...we need to make sure ALL students receive good instruction, no matter where they live or go to school.
I agree with the previous statements posted and the statements by Mr. Fryer.
There are different kinds of learners and learning styles and parents and teachers need to address it.
Having an adequate education in the 21st century will not exist without digital literacy that encompasses so much more than just the basics. We cannot just provide the basics, students will not be able to succeed in the world without more than just the basics.
Poverty is a huge concern but please remember that even though a child may live in poverty, he or she can still learn and succeed in life. Don't hold their socioeconomic lifestyle against him/her.
I think Anna made an excellent statement, with her comment..."Everyone seems to know that there are elephants, but no one seems to know what to do about them!"
Part of the issue is low expectations on the part of teachers. Even if poverty is a big issue and creates barriers I have seen terrific teachers really move kids when the expectation is that they will succeed. You have to instill a belief in teachers that they are capable of working with all kids, give them tools to differientiate, and lots of encouragement when you begin to see growth. Poverty is a huge issue that can be overcome.
I thought the comments everyone made before were accurate and on track. We do have several elephants in the room that need to be dealt with, but I also agree with Kim - a lot of our kids' performance is based on teacher expectations. Children don't all learn the same way and that must be accommodated, but teachers must set the standards high regardless of where the kids come from - we need high quality educators in all schools to educate children from all backgrounds. Working in a poverty-stricken school, I know that children from poverty require more support and scaffolding, but they can soar when given the appropriate support.
There are two issues here that educators must face. Students do have different learning styles and there really is no such thing as a cookie cutter for education. One could even say male and female students have different needs when it comes to learning. These learning styles will be further challenge by the needs of 21st century learners, especially since we are in the 21st century and most of our classrooms resemble the classrooms of the 19th century.
Poverty and its effects on students can be viewed a number of ways. If a student comes from generational poverty their needs are different than students who come from situational poverty. Students who come from generational poverty have distinct cultural differences than "middle class" students and many classrooms are set up with a "middle class" culture. Addressing the issue of cultural difference will go a long way in acheiving success with students who come from a background of poverty. Teachers need to keep high expectations for students, however, this needs to be done in the context of what background the students bring with them to the classroom.
I do not think all teachers necessarily have low expectations for low income students. Could it not be that it is extremely difficult to "teach" all students in a room when every single student is on a different level? Regardless of how much I try to differentiate lessons and structure my classroom to give one-on-one tutoring with students who need it, there are always those who slip between the cracks. My point is that I am trying and acknowledge that I can not reach all my students so what is happening to the students whose teachers do not try? When I look at those who do not make it, it is often poor and minority students. So I think we can all agree we know about the elephants, but the problem is we do not know what to do about them. Holly makes a great point that I agree with totally - we should not be putting all students on the same pathway!
I have read Ruby Payne's book and really learned a whole lot about how impoverished students learn and behave in a classroom situation. It was really eye opening for me and has helped me change the way I teach and discipline these students.
Implementing technology within the classroom, allows the impoverished students to gain a 21st century education, which is only a positive all the way around.
I do agree that students living in poverty and lack of funding are issues that make our jobs as educators more challenging. However, I do not feel we should differentiate our expectations of students but instead the scaffolding we give them to meet the expectations. Every child has the ability to learn, and who are we to set expectation levels higher or lower in response to external factors. Our job is to provide a rigorous and relevant curriculum to produce responsible citizens who can think critically, meet their basic needs, and solve problems. In today's society with the economic turmoil we cannot believe that kids can just graduate with any old kind of education and get a job. We must push ourselves to think outside of the box, and not allow excuses or "elephants", however valid, to hinder the success of our students.
I agree that a lot teachers don't know how to teach students in poverty. However I don't know how a teacher can say that "I cant teach students in poverty". If you are a good and effective teacher you should be able to teach a child who is poor, rich, middle class, white black, asian, hispanic et. Who said that we would have one type of child to teach??? When these teachers went to school, did they learn how to just teach one type of child. It is sad that you find some educators who feel that they can only teach one way and to one type of student. Where is the challenge?? where is the creativity??? I feel that a lot of teachers don't want to go that extra mile. I know that teaching students in poverty is hard but just because they are in poverty doesn not mean that learning is impossible. We have to understand their situations and at times may have to modify how we do things to get the results we want. The elephant may be poverty but poverty should not be the end all if we have dedicated teachers who truly want to help ALL children.
Someone needs to let a mouse loose in the room! Get the elephants out. As for poverty, Ruby Payne does an excellent seminar on the issue of poverty in schools. Unfortunately with poverty comes a lack of exposure to education before kindergarten. On the first day of kindergarten we consider students behind if they cannot recognize all 26 alphabetic letters and at least a few sight words and concept of reading. I believe that the expectations set should be set equally and that ALL students can be successful.
As for factory education as Holly put it, teachers are not given a choice in this situation after the second grade. Federal and state accountability force teachers to teach to the so called "basic" needs of education and completely eliminate time and resources for teaching the diverse learner. Auditory and visual learners aside, kids need opportunities.
I believe we are beginning to talk more about the poverty elephant. While we're talking about it...I'm not sure we're doing a whole lot to address the issue. Our low socioeconomic schools are still low-performing (for the most part) and as Kim mentioned, it comes down to low expectations. Often when I visit some of these schools, I hear teachers saying, "Well you don't know what it's like to work with our kids." These classrooms often lack rigor and unfortunately appear to offer a watered down curriculum. Maybe another elephant in the room is that some educators don't believe "all" children can learn. (Thank goodness for the teachers who teach in those schools and believe in the children who walk through the door. We need our best and brightest in our poorest schools!)
In regards to "adequate education" I want more than adequate for my own children...don't you? I want my children to have the best...and the greatest opportunties their education can afford them. I really want that for all children. The future of our society demands that!
I think it's true that low socio-economic schools are low performing and lack rigor, I also have to stop and examine the students dealing with poverty in typical schools, like mine. Our expectations are very high for all of our students, and some students from poverty are still performing below grade level. Teachers are working hard to provide FAPE to all students, but once students get past 2nd grade, some application must happen at home! Not always, but the majority of students with poverty are lacking this piece of education.
Ultimately it comes down to us as educators. We can find excuses for why we CAN'T teach kids, lack of resources, poverty, lack of family support...but we have to step up to the job we signed on for, and give EVERY child our absolute BEST everyday. Again, education in the 21st century cannot simply be adequate, as Angie said, therefore the adequate teachers are going to need extra support and guidance to become excellent.
Children do not get to choose what type of socio-ecomonic family they are born into. If they could, I am sure they would not choose poverty. The challenge is then up to the teachers. We can use poverty as a excuse for our students not learning or we can adapt our teaching to meet their needs and see our students succeed. If a student knows her teacher believes she can be successful she will do everything she can to prove her right.
The other issue he mentioned was adequacy amongst schools. In North Carolina, the tax base varies significantly from county to county. State funding is not enough and local funding is so different between school systems. That was the main issue in the Leandro Case. Students are not offered the same educational opportunities between school systems within our state. We all have seen poverty at the individual level, but it also can occur at the school and system levels. As principals, how do we overcome this obstacle?
I liked the comment of letting a mouse out in the room to get rid of the elephants, but these are two issues that we have to deal with in education. I see the poverty "elephant" being dealt with more so at this point though.
The adequacy is more difficult. I agree with the gentlemean, there are some school systems that have more funding than others, but it can also be an issue of how a school system decides to use the money that they have. For example, I work in a smaller school system that doesn't have the tax base that some systems have. I have heard so much over the years about reading and math that it seemed like that is all we needed to teach. I see that changing now. Our system, and indicidual schools, have focused on more that just reading and math. The have adopted the philosophy that our students must learn the skills neccessary to be successful in the 21st Century. Many of our schools have purchased technology tools to assist in our students' learning. This is from a county with probably one of the highest unemployment rates in the area.
The only issue that I have, is that our schools still need to embrace the Arts more. Our students only receive music twice a month and art twice a month. Of course, that is better than my daughters in their school system, who receive no visual art at all. This is where school systems with lower budgets make their cuts, or at least it appears to be from my point of view.
We are all individuals and this includes individuals in the classroom as well. If students all learned the same thing, at the same time, in the same way, there would be no need for training such as Ruby Payne or Howard Gardner. Differentiating instruction and high student expectations for everyone are keys to the successful classroom. We must not allow the "elephants" in the room to lower our expectations of student success.
Poverty has been addressed and continues to be addressed in Surry County Schools. Two summers ago every teacher in Surry County attended workshops by the poverty expert Rita Pearson. Poverty is no excuse not to teach a child. Economic status may impact the "Bible school crafts" projects too many teachers assign, but should never be an excuse for low test scores. Teachers must move away from teaching one way to one type of student, but begin to give learning styles inventories and come to know each child. Does this mean numerous lesson plans? No, for those teachers who have had sufficient training in differentiation, this isn't an issue. We must vary our assessments and instruction techniques.
Teachers could do more with what they have. They must be willing to change, step out of their comfort zone, and don't "do it" because "it" has always been done that way. Reform doesn't always hurt teaching and learning............teachers can too!
During our Ruby Payne training, our staff took a bus tour of our school district. For some of the teachers, it was an eye opening experience. For others, it was revisting thier past. Children have no control over the life to which they are born and raised in over the years. Some children come to school with more pressing issues than answering number three on math homework. We are the adults, it is up to us to adapt our teaching styles to best fit the needs of all of our students. Only when we can acknowledge the "elephants in the room' can we start to address the changes that need to be made in education.
One elephant that we never talk about is the fact that we are one of only a few countries that is trying to educate its entire citizenry! So in essence when we compare ourselves to other countries - we are not comparing apples to apples. We have compulsory education - we can insist that everyone sit in a seat at school but there is till an element of choice in whether to learn or not.
Politics and education do not mix. After the last election I feel more confident on that. How can people make decisions who either have never been in the classroom or who are so far gone out of the classroom that it is no longer relevant? Everyone says what sounds right (help the poor, provide education for all) but 'keeping it real' where do we really see that at?
Post a Comment