Of course, the first few sentences in this chapter made my skin crawl... and related directly to my current school situation.
I read on page 111, "test scores may be rising, but that's at least partly as a result of states lowering standards to meet the law's demand that all students become proficient by 2014." And, I am reminded of a recent conversation I had with our high school counselor. The counselor used to serve our one and only middle school (small county) and moved this year to us (next door). I was in her office one day asking for advice - what do I do? My students simply cannot perform. They cannot add much less solve an algebraic expression. How did they get to me (9th grade) with so little knowledge? And, here's what I heard - its a problem. I agree. But look at the middle school - although its not advised, they still ability group, somewhat... and teachers water down the curriculum for the struggling students. The 80 they earn is actually equivalent to another child's 55, but if the standards aren't lowered - they won't learn anything. Where do you draw the line? I am not saying its excusable... I'm just saying that is how it is.
So, yes! If anyone can relate to the dumbing down of standards - its me. And, quite honestly it affects me, the high school teacher in a negative way. Then, the students reach high school where remediation is not allowed... so these kids get stuck. And, since the standards were lowered until me... they cannot figure out the sudden change in grades. The school cannot figure out the sudden drop in proficiency - really? I mean, come on - if we are going to have standards - stick to them. And, if not - allow me to teach what my students understand... don't do both... in different grades - don't lower standards one year and require higher standards the next. Everyone in school needs to be on the same page.
And then... the chapter continued. I love the quotation from Zhao when he warns that the emphasis on "centralized curriculum, standardized testing, accountability, required courses of study - could kill creativity.." duh. I look at my classroom and I realize that not everyone is the same. I have students on a 9th grade math level and students on a first grade math level. And, the state requires I teach each one the same material - why? I want to meet my students where they are, but I cannot. I don't want to lower their standards - I want to meet them with a standard they can master and slowly (bit by bit) bring them up to speed with the current standard they need. Instead, I receive students with half learned, watered down standards who are unable and not willing to master the ninth grade standards. And, I (although willing) am unable to meet them where they are. They are dying in math... dying in school... and losing the value of education. Its an endless cycle. A crazy one. One that drives me nuts. We are not only killing readers, we are killing students. And, I honestly do not know a solution to stop the madness.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Monday, October 25, 2010
How much is too much? Or, too little?
Several thoughts from chapter 4:
1. Should I be worried? According to Gallagher, teaching has long-term effects. Meaning, "even two years after the fact, the performance of fifth grade students is still affected by the quality of their third-grade teachers." If this is the case, which I believe it is - how could they ever dream about performance pay? And, should I be worried? What if my students had a HORRIBLE math experience in 7th grade... do I pay the price?
2. I love what Gallagher says - "students are spending way too much time listening to their teachers and not enough time developing their critical thinking skills." How true! It is difficult to show tough love and not directly show students what to do. Where do you draw the line between instruction and no, you need to think on your own?!?! And, what happens if you misinterpret their confusion for laziness? So often my students are lazy... simply saying "I don't get it" when in reality, they don't want to think. How do I know when they actually don't get it and when they just aren't thinking?
3. I too struggle with the balance, or as Gallagher calls it - I struggle with identifying the sweet spot. I love his questions as I too ask them daily - "how much help is too much help? How much help is too little help? What is the right balance?"
In fact, I struggled with all of these issues today in my classroom. Many of my students were giving me the, "I don't get it. I don't understand" when they have performed on these same problems before. How do you know if its lack of understanding or simply lack of wanting? I would love some feedback.
1. Should I be worried? According to Gallagher, teaching has long-term effects. Meaning, "even two years after the fact, the performance of fifth grade students is still affected by the quality of their third-grade teachers." If this is the case, which I believe it is - how could they ever dream about performance pay? And, should I be worried? What if my students had a HORRIBLE math experience in 7th grade... do I pay the price?
2. I love what Gallagher says - "students are spending way too much time listening to their teachers and not enough time developing their critical thinking skills." How true! It is difficult to show tough love and not directly show students what to do. Where do you draw the line between instruction and no, you need to think on your own?!?! And, what happens if you misinterpret their confusion for laziness? So often my students are lazy... simply saying "I don't get it" when in reality, they don't want to think. How do I know when they actually don't get it and when they just aren't thinking?
3. I too struggle with the balance, or as Gallagher calls it - I struggle with identifying the sweet spot. I love his questions as I too ask them daily - "how much help is too much help? How much help is too little help? What is the right balance?"
In fact, I struggled with all of these issues today in my classroom. Many of my students were giving me the, "I don't get it. I don't understand" when they have performed on these same problems before. How do you know if its lack of understanding or simply lack of wanting? I would love some feedback.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Readicide Chapter 3.... part 2
How true! Mr. Gallagher really hit the nail on the head with this one when he wrote,
We would never buy a book at Barnes and Noble if it came with mandated chapter-by-chapter exams. We would never read a book so that we could tackle worksheets afterward. We would never being a new read with the expressed goal of earning points. And we would never feel compelled to read if we had to complete a project after ever book. Yet, as teachers, we do all of these things to developing readers. We subject them repeatedly to treatments that are counterproductive to developing book lovers. (page 72-73).
How true! And, we do this with so much more than just reading. We bore students to death with standardized tests, multiple choice this and standards that and we are fully surprised to learn they hate school! Instead, we need to appeal to students and meet them where they are. In fact, I loved Mr. Gallagher's idea of assessment. I enjoyed reading Mr. Gallagher's idea of one page papers - yes, accountability is important, but it doesn't have to be boring. Why can't we just let students tell us whats going on? Instead of always quizzing, testing, questioning, etc. - why can't we just let them tell us what they know in an informal kind of way?
And, then, here's another point - on the way to school this morning, I was disheartened to hear President Obama's take on the educational system. To paraphrase Obama, our students are not performing as well as other countries. So, to fix the problem, he suggests a mandated additional month of school. Wait a minute - to me, this idea further promotes everything we as educators are striving to fight against. Why make students who hate school and perform poorly in school continue to attend for an additional month - its school-i-cide.
Instead of systematically killing the love of learning, let's revamp the school system we have now. Let's quit asking teachers to teach the test and quiz and question students into boredom. Instead, let's allow students an opportunity to TRULY learn and to develop a love of learning. Only when students desire to learn - will they actually learn. Just like only when students desire to read will they actually read... and get something out of it. We should not bully students into reading. And, we should not bully students into school. There is a right way and a wrong way to educate. And, unfortunately, many of our practices now are pushing students further away from reading and further away from school.
We would never buy a book at Barnes and Noble if it came with mandated chapter-by-chapter exams. We would never read a book so that we could tackle worksheets afterward. We would never being a new read with the expressed goal of earning points. And we would never feel compelled to read if we had to complete a project after ever book. Yet, as teachers, we do all of these things to developing readers. We subject them repeatedly to treatments that are counterproductive to developing book lovers. (page 72-73).
How true! And, we do this with so much more than just reading. We bore students to death with standardized tests, multiple choice this and standards that and we are fully surprised to learn they hate school! Instead, we need to appeal to students and meet them where they are. In fact, I loved Mr. Gallagher's idea of assessment. I enjoyed reading Mr. Gallagher's idea of one page papers - yes, accountability is important, but it doesn't have to be boring. Why can't we just let students tell us whats going on? Instead of always quizzing, testing, questioning, etc. - why can't we just let them tell us what they know in an informal kind of way?
And, then, here's another point - on the way to school this morning, I was disheartened to hear President Obama's take on the educational system. To paraphrase Obama, our students are not performing as well as other countries. So, to fix the problem, he suggests a mandated additional month of school. Wait a minute - to me, this idea further promotes everything we as educators are striving to fight against. Why make students who hate school and perform poorly in school continue to attend for an additional month - its school-i-cide.
Instead of systematically killing the love of learning, let's revamp the school system we have now. Let's quit asking teachers to teach the test and quiz and question students into boredom. Instead, let's allow students an opportunity to TRULY learn and to develop a love of learning. Only when students desire to learn - will they actually learn. Just like only when students desire to read will they actually read... and get something out of it. We should not bully students into reading. And, we should not bully students into school. There is a right way and a wrong way to educate. And, unfortunately, many of our practices now are pushing students further away from reading and further away from school.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Readicide Chapter 2, again... a little more
So, after re-reading Chapter 2 for this week's assignment, I was amazed at what I didn't see before.
What is all this information about word poverty? It appears actual poverty and word poverty go hand in hand. Of course, I totally agree. It does make sense for a less-educated person to remain in poverty, and as a result, for their child to enter school less-educated. Of course, I realize there are exceptions to the rule.
I do love the quotation on page 32, It is simply not a matter of the number of words unheard and unlearned. When words are not heard, concepts are not learned. When syntactic forms are never encountered, there is less knowledge about the relationship of events in a story. When story forms are never known, there is less ability to infer and predict. When cultural traditions and the feelings of others are never experienced, there is less understanding of what people feel. Yet, despite the research that indicates impoverished children are already behind in school, we still expect these students to learn, maintain, and establish the same information as their more well-off counterparts. Basically, we expect students to start off at different levels and to all learn the same amount. In other words, we want and expect the students who are behind to learn twice as much of the material that is already more difficult to them. And, then, we get mad when they cannot perform. We expect Title 1 schools to perform at the same levels at the same times as those with more well-off, better prepared students. Is that fair? I don't think so.
And, then, we punish schools when students cannot perform - even though they are making progress. Yes, word poverty is a problem. But, I venture to say that word poverty without help is an even greater problem. We need to recognize progress and not belittle it. We need to commend schools who help students that are behind... and not punish them when they cannot meet AYP because they have greater challenges to start with.
What is all this information about word poverty? It appears actual poverty and word poverty go hand in hand. Of course, I totally agree. It does make sense for a less-educated person to remain in poverty, and as a result, for their child to enter school less-educated. Of course, I realize there are exceptions to the rule.
I do love the quotation on page 32, It is simply not a matter of the number of words unheard and unlearned. When words are not heard, concepts are not learned. When syntactic forms are never encountered, there is less knowledge about the relationship of events in a story. When story forms are never known, there is less ability to infer and predict. When cultural traditions and the feelings of others are never experienced, there is less understanding of what people feel. Yet, despite the research that indicates impoverished children are already behind in school, we still expect these students to learn, maintain, and establish the same information as their more well-off counterparts. Basically, we expect students to start off at different levels and to all learn the same amount. In other words, we want and expect the students who are behind to learn twice as much of the material that is already more difficult to them. And, then, we get mad when they cannot perform. We expect Title 1 schools to perform at the same levels at the same times as those with more well-off, better prepared students. Is that fair? I don't think so.
And, then, we punish schools when students cannot perform - even though they are making progress. Yes, word poverty is a problem. But, I venture to say that word poverty without help is an even greater problem. We need to recognize progress and not belittle it. We need to commend schools who help students that are behind... and not punish them when they cannot meet AYP because they have greater challenges to start with.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Readicide - Chapters 2 and Class 3
At our last class, we had a heated discussion regarding the educational system. Some folks favor the idea of narrowing the educational realm - letting people study what they are good at. Others believe high school students are too young to decide on a life pathway. I, of course, argue that no one truly know what they want to do when they grow up... until they do. And, oftentimes, people change their minds - after all, didn't we? Isn't that why we are ALL in the MAT program?
Then, I read Chapter 2 of Readicide. And, within the first two pages - I became more convinced that students NEED education. Yes, I believe students need different levels of education (it is completely unnecessary for a student who struggles in math to learn trigonometry and for a student who excels in English to sit in a regular classroom). But, I do think students NEED to be educated. After all, we just simply need to know whats going on around us so that we can make knowledgeable decisions.
And, here is where chapter 2 comes in. Page 28, "only one of my ninth graders could name the sitting vice president of the United States..." I don't know about you, but I find this unnerving - in the words of Kelly Gallagher, "there is something seriously wrong with this picture!"
Could it be that our students are lazy? Could it be that our students simply do not care? Or, could it be that we are teaching incorrectly? Whatever the reason - "can we afford to graduate students who are so intensely geared toward reading exams that they leave our schools never having had the opportunity to look out the other reading windows?" (p. 29). Could it be that we need to EDUCATE our students to help them find and interest? Could it be that we need to connect school to our students' lives? Could it be that we need to teach our students so they can be knowledgeable contributing citizens with a complete picture of the world rather than a partial picture? Could it be that our education system, although deeply flawed, had one thing correct - we need to educate students and help them become educated, knowledgeable members of society... so they, in turn, can affect society for the better?!?! If it is so - let's jump on it. Our students need the help we can provide.
Then, I read Chapter 2 of Readicide. And, within the first two pages - I became more convinced that students NEED education. Yes, I believe students need different levels of education (it is completely unnecessary for a student who struggles in math to learn trigonometry and for a student who excels in English to sit in a regular classroom). But, I do think students NEED to be educated. After all, we just simply need to know whats going on around us so that we can make knowledgeable decisions.
And, here is where chapter 2 comes in. Page 28, "only one of my ninth graders could name the sitting vice president of the United States..." I don't know about you, but I find this unnerving - in the words of Kelly Gallagher, "there is something seriously wrong with this picture!"
Could it be that our students are lazy? Could it be that our students simply do not care? Or, could it be that we are teaching incorrectly? Whatever the reason - "can we afford to graduate students who are so intensely geared toward reading exams that they leave our schools never having had the opportunity to look out the other reading windows?" (p. 29). Could it be that we need to EDUCATE our students to help them find and interest? Could it be that we need to connect school to our students' lives? Could it be that we need to teach our students so they can be knowledgeable contributing citizens with a complete picture of the world rather than a partial picture? Could it be that our education system, although deeply flawed, had one thing correct - we need to educate students and help them become educated, knowledgeable members of society... so they, in turn, can affect society for the better?!?! If it is so - let's jump on it. Our students need the help we can provide.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
We are Already Behind... an Add-On
So, I found this article regarding the New Math Curriculum (click on the link to view). It appears the Atlanta Journal and Constitution has a small glimpse of how stressful teaching the test can be on both students and teachers.
I personally love the quotation, from Aker, co-president of the Gwinnet County Association of Educators, she writes, "You have to cover everything. It’s a lesson a day...There is no time to get them to master each section.” To me, this statement sums up "teaching the test" perfectly. What do you think?
I personally love the quotation, from Aker, co-president of the Gwinnet County Association of Educators, she writes, "You have to cover everything. It’s a lesson a day...There is no time to get them to master each section.” To me, this statement sums up "teaching the test" perfectly. What do you think?
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
The Race is On... And we are already Behind!
I teach math. Let it be noted that our school is NI-4 because of mathematics. We have a special state lady who consults with every mathematics teacher on a daily basis. Every day, for thirty minutes, we target poor mathematics students with intensive, test-preparation studies. (Most of these students are traditionally unsuccessful in math and, as a result, most of them hate math.) And, some of our students are currently enrolled in 3 mathematics courses - remedial math, math support, and regular math - allowing them 2.5-3 hours a day for a subject they are traditionally unsuccessful in and quite honestly a subject they hate. Unfortunately, this problem isn't unique to our school, it is rampant across America. Schools are continually striving to do better, to serve better, to teach better. And, the measurement we use to guage learning is a standardized test.
In Chapter one of Readicide, Gallagher writes, "reluctant readers drown in test preparation, ensuring any chance they may have had of developing a lifelong reading habit is lost. Worse than turning off to reading, students grow to hate reading (page 17)." WOW! Boy do I agree! And, for me personally - I relate this phenomenon to mathematics. When we force a student to continually emerse himself or herself shallowly into a subject they are unsuccessful, we set them up for failure. When we fail to go back and review the basics a student missed because we are on a strict schedule due to testing, we set them up for failure. Our school systems are so test driven, we continually miss the mark. Education is about learning, not about testing. And, "when they [students] perform poorly on mandated tests, we respond by giving them an intensified dose of the ineffective treatment" (Readicide, 23)... we set our students up for failure when we "immerse our students in a curriculum that drives the love of reading out of them, prevents them from developing into deeper thinkers, ensures the achievement gap will remain, reduces their college readiness, and guarantees the result will be that our schools will fail (Readicide, 23). We as educators need to get a grip and realize its not about the test - its about our students. And, we need to refocus our teaching strategies to accompany a learning friendly environment.
In Chapter one of Readicide, Gallagher writes, "reluctant readers drown in test preparation, ensuring any chance they may have had of developing a lifelong reading habit is lost. Worse than turning off to reading, students grow to hate reading (page 17)." WOW! Boy do I agree! And, for me personally - I relate this phenomenon to mathematics. When we force a student to continually emerse himself or herself shallowly into a subject they are unsuccessful, we set them up for failure. When we fail to go back and review the basics a student missed because we are on a strict schedule due to testing, we set them up for failure. Our school systems are so test driven, we continually miss the mark. Education is about learning, not about testing. And, "when they [students] perform poorly on mandated tests, we respond by giving them an intensified dose of the ineffective treatment" (Readicide, 23)... we set our students up for failure when we "immerse our students in a curriculum that drives the love of reading out of them, prevents them from developing into deeper thinkers, ensures the achievement gap will remain, reduces their college readiness, and guarantees the result will be that our schools will fail (Readicide, 23). We as educators need to get a grip and realize its not about the test - its about our students. And, we need to refocus our teaching strategies to accompany a learning friendly environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)