The large immigrant population in the United States, coupled with the brilliantly thought-out policy of instituting one-size-fits all high stakes exit exams for high school graduates, is leaving ESL students behind. A study by the Center on Education Policy and reported in the Boston Globe reveals immigrants are unfairly targeted by state requirements on graduation tests. The implications are huge as 9 out of 10 limited-English students will face high-stakes tests in their state by 2012.
Another reason that holding all children to the same standards doesn't work.
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
NCLB Rebellion Grows
--and grows. This and much more at NCLBgrassroots.org:
As America’s children and teachers head back to school, the grassroots rebellion against NCLB already has caught on in 47 of the 50 states, with five states – MN, ME, NV, NJ and VA – likely to be the biggest anti-NCLB hotspots in 2005-2006 . . .
Notice
Beginning Friday, I will be in Idaho tasting jelly and watching the pig judging at the Idaho Fair for a week. Judy Rabin will be posting equally-subversive materials during this time.
IB Curriculum and Conservative Resistance
IB stands for International Baccalaureate, an interesting, balanced, imaginative, and rigorous program that is being used successfully to attract minority students toward academic pursuits. Jay Mathews in the Washington Post has a piece on how it is being used in Maryland. Here is a description from Schenectady, New York's IB World School Site:
The International Baccalaureate (IB) Program is an internationally recognized course of study for highly motivated 11th and 12th grade students. Currently, the program is offered in over 800 secondary schools in nearly 100 countries. To earn the IB diploma, students must pass examinations in 6 subject areas, write an extended essay of some 4,000 words describing an independent research project, complete 150 hours of creative, action, and service activities (CAS), and take part in a critical thinking seminar called Theory of Knowledge. This rigorous, comprehensive curriculum offers an integrated approach to learning while exposing students to a diversity of viewpoints in hopes of fostering tolerance and intercultural understanding.Should it come as a surprise that this curriculum has already met resistance from the wing-nuts who see this curriculum as inappropriate, nay, unpatriotic--especially for African-American students. From the Post:
Some say IB does not align with some of the college courses for which it, like the much larger Advanced Placement program, was designed to substitute. Others say it puts too much emphasis on international understanding. One Fairfax County parent went so far as to say IB "promotes socialism, disarmament, radical environmentalism and moral relativism while attempting to undermine Christian religious values and national sovereignty."The IB school certainly doesn't resemble the MacSchools for African-Americans that the privatizers are dreaming of--IB has no uniforms (brown?), no Open Court direct instruction, no open embrace of self-subjugation in a pre-conceived and fruitless future. Unpatriotic, I guess.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Must Reading Research
From the Bell Policy Center website, this report demonstrates once again the fact that the achievement gap is an economic gap more than anything else:
Understanding Colorado’s Achievement Gap (pdf):
An Analysis of Student Performance Data by Race and Income
Bell's newest report summarizes the academic achievement gap in Colorado. It serves as a comprehensive sourcebook for test results, comparisons and recommendations. Click the title for a link to the document online as a pdf, or contact Bell for a free copy.
Bloomberg Strikes Again
Thanks to Bloomberg's progressive vision, NYC has moved ahead of Louisiana in the Battle of the Testers. New York can now boast that it has tests to determine grade promotion in grades 3, 5, and 7:
Panel Votes to Hold Back 7th Graders Who Fail English Test
The Bloomberg administration won approval of a new seventh-grade promotion policy last night during a contentious meeting at the Department of Education's Lower Manhattan headquarters, where the Panel for Educational Policy voted in favor of holding back seventh graders who fail citywide English tests starting next year.
Although three members of the panel were absent and two abstained, a resolution to adopt new promotion standards for seventh graders received eight votes -- one more than needed to win approval. But before the vote, several protesters in the audience stood and, with scarves tied around their mouths, turned their backs to the panel.
During the approximately 15 minutes allowed for public comment, several other people criticized education officials for tying students' promotion to success on standardized tests. Others said that the new policy placed undue blame on students for what is, ultimately, the system's failure to educate.
But none of those objections compared to the avalanche of complaints that followed Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's first announcement of tougher promotion rules for third graders in early 2004. Back then, the Panel for Educational Policy threatened to veto the plan. Mr. Bloomberg won approval only after he fired two of his appointees to the panel and the Staten Island borough president dismissed a third.
During a presentation about the promotions standards for seventh-graders last night, the city's deputy chancellor for teaching and learning, Carmen Fariña, told a roomful of parents and teachers that the administration's promotion rules introduced during the past two years for third and fifth graders had produced ''a tremendous amount of achievement.''
In fact, the administration's policies to end so-called social promotion in the lower grades have meant that fewer children have been held back, not more, mainly because of intense and expensive remedial efforts.
''It's time to do the same thing for middle school students so they can be successful in high school,'' Ms. Fariña said. She added that the initiative was not about punishment but about ''being prepared.''
Mr. Bloomberg first vowed in May to take on the issue of poor performance in junior high school after fewer students passed the state's eighth-grade reading test than in last year. Fewer than a third of the city's eighth graders were reading at or above grade level, according to the most recent scores.
The administration has pledged $40 million toward intervention efforts for the middle grades, including, Ms. Fariña said last night, Saturday classes, organizational and study skills workshops for students, counseling for parents of adolescents, and more teacher training.
''If we do not do this, we are dooming students to fail in high school,'' she said.
Once new state math requirements take effect during the school year 2006-7, promotions for seventh graders will be tied to scores on both of the city's standardized reading and math tests.
NY Times Awakens from Long Sleep
Just as Rip van Winkle did right up the road from the City over 200 years ago, the Grey Lady emerges from a long slumber to find that much has occurred since she fell asleep 20 years ago believing the Reagan Administration's Back to Basics, Version 1.0. Today's op-ed, No Emotion Left Behind, would seem to indicate as much, anyway:
THE debate over education reform has tended to divide children's learning along two axes, the emotional and the academic. Either we can address children's academic performance, the conventional thinking holds, or we can address their emotional and social needs. Before No Child Left Behind comes up for reauthorization in 2007, we'd like to deliver some important news: The two kinds of learning are intimately connected. That means that promoting students' social and emotional skills plays a critical role in improving their academic performance.
Social and emotional learning is the process through which children learn to recognize and manage emotions. It allows them to understand and interact with others, to make good decisions and to behave ethically and responsibly. The best social and emotional learning programs engage not only children, but also their teachers, administrators and parents in providing children with the information and skills that help them make ethical and sensible decisions -- to avoid bullying, for instance, or to resist pressures to engage in destructive or risky behavior, such as substance abuse. When they are well designed and executed, such programs have consistently achieved these goals, turning out students who are good citizens committed to serving their communities and cooperating with others.
Recent studies, however, have revealed something even more exciting about these programs. Along with Joseph Durlak, a Loyola University psychologist, one of us (Roger Weissberg) recently conducted the largest-ever quantitative analysis, encompassing more than 300 research studies on this subject. The results, which will be presented later this week for the first time, show that social and emotional learning programs significantly improve students' academic performance. The review shows, for example, that an average student enrolled in a social and emotional learning program ranks at least 10 percentile points higher on achievement tests than students who do not participate in such programs. Moreover, compared with their counterparts outside of these programs, social and emotional learning students have significantly better attendance records; their classroom behavior is more constructive and less often disruptive; they like school more; and they have better grade point averages. They are also less likely to be suspended or otherwise disciplined.
The numbers vindicate what has long been common sense among many teachers and parents: that children who are given clear behavioral standards and social skills, allowing them to feel safe, valued, confident and challenged, will exhibit better school behavior and learn more to boot.
This simple observation is of monumental importance as we attempt to improve our country's public schools. We don't have to choose between academic achievement and the development of character. Rather, we should concentrate on both. No Child Left Behind has created greater accountability in American education, but it is inadequately financed, it fails to effectively address the needs of special education students, and its assessment standards for all children are far too narrow. A truly effective new law should include benchmarks for social and civic learning.
One state, Illinois, has blazed a path in this regard. There is a social and emotional learning component to the Illinois State Learning Standards, and the state's school districts now incorporate such programs into their curriculums. Federal legislation should follow that lead. The new law should also include provisions for conducting systematic classroom assessments of children's social and emotional growth.
What we now understand about the role of social and emotional learning in academic learning should lead us to dramatic action, but it builds on common wisdom. Good teachers know that they can't sacrifice one part of a child for another. Now they have the figures to prove it. The time has come for policy makers to help restore balance to our nation's classrooms and, in so doing, to help American children achieve their fullest potential.
Monday, August 15, 2005
NCLB Left Behind?
This opportunity to participate in the ongoing NCLB debate comes from Bob Schaeffer at ARN-L:
NCLB LEFT BEHIND: NEW REPORT TO DETAIL
GROWING GRASSROOTS REBELLION AGAINST
CONTROVERSIALFEDERAL ACT
Study: 47 States Already in Varying Stages of Revolt Against
NCLB; More Momentum Expected in New School Year, With 5 States
(MN, ME, NV, NJ and VA) Poised to Be Biggest Battlegrounds in
2005-2006.
As American children and their teachers head back to school,
the widespread grassroots rebellion against the controversial
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has taken root in 47 of the
50 states and is likely to gain new momentum during the
2005-2006 school year, according to a detailed analysis from
NCLBgrassroots.org, a project of the nonprofit and nonpartisan
Civil Society Institute (CSI).
The major new report will be released during a live,
phone-based news event (with full Q&A) at 1:30 p.m. ET on
August 17, 2005. News event speakers will be:
* Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal;
* Minnesota State Rep. Mindy Greiling, Roseville, MN;
* Laredo (TX) Independent School District Assistant Superintendent
of Schools Sylvia Bruni;
* Parents for Public Schools Board President Lisa Schiff,
San Francisco, CA; and
* Civil Society Institute President Pam Solo.
Entitled "NCLB Left Behind: Understanding the Growing Grassroots
Rebellion Against a Controversial Law," the new
NCLBGrassroots.org report provides a detailed look at the
various aspects of the grassroots backlash in 47 states against
NCLB, including the three states (Colorado, Connecticut and Utah)
already in “open revolt” and the five states (Minnesota, Maine,
Nevada, New Jersey and Virginia) expected to be the biggest hot
spots of NCLB opposition during the 2005-2006 school year.
TO PARTICIPATE: To participate in the live, two-way telenews
event (with Q&A), dial 1 (800) 860-2442 by 1:30 p.m. ET on
August 17, 2005. Ask for the “NCLB Left Behind” news event.
CAN'T PARTICIPATE?: A streaming audio replay of the call will
be available on the Web at NCLBGrassroots.org as of 6 p.m. ET
on August 17, 2005.
To Dream the Impossible Dream. . .
Which of these goals are achievable in the time frame provided by the Law? Which is achievable ever? Which goals call for closing the achievement gap?
When a public law holds public schools accountable for their failure in achieving unachievable goals, what is the purpose of that law? Is it to prove the failure of the public schools, to demonstrate the uncaring stupidity of those who signed built this law, or both?
Performance Goal 1 — Reading and Mathematics — By 2013-14, all students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics.
Performance Goal 2 — Limited English Proficient Students — All Limited English proficient students will become proficient in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics.
Performance Goal 3 — Highly Qualified Teachers — By 2005-06, all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers.
Performance Goal 4 — Safe and Drug Free Schools — All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.
Performance Goal 5 — Graduation Rate — All students will graduate from high school.
When a public law holds public schools accountable for their failure in achieving unachievable goals, what is the purpose of that law? Is it to prove the failure of the public schools, to demonstrate the uncaring stupidity of those who signed built this law, or both?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)