Archives for category: Childhood, Pre-K, K

I recently attended the commencement ceremonies at Queens College in New York City, one of the nation’s finest public institutions.

At the ceremony specifically for graduates of the education program, the dean opened his remarks by citing an African proverb, “How fare the children?”

The answer should be “The children are well.”

In a good and decent society, we take care of the children, because in doing so, we not only express our humanity, but we ensure our future.

In this society, it might be well to ask, “How fare the 1%?”

The 1% fare exceedingly well. Their share of the national income rises each year.

And none fare so well as the Pritzker family of Chicago.

Penny Pritzker was a member of the Chicago Board of Education.

She voted to close 50 Chicago public schools while increasing the growth of charter schools, one of which bears her name.

Soon she will be President Obama’s Secretary of Commerce.

Her brother fares well too.

How fare the children?

Not so well.

Nearly one of every four children in the United States lives in poverty.

Many go to bad hungry; growing numbers are homeless.

Many are in schools without art or music, without guidance counselors or librarians.

Many are in classes so large that they get no individual attention.

Whose fault is this?

It must be their teachers.

They must be graded, ranked, evaluated closely.

Makes no sense, but the mainstream media has swallowed it whole.

 

This is a story about a private contractor who figured out how to make big money: open a center to diagnose and treat preschoolers with disabilities.

The state of New York pays for everything, and no one pays much attention to the quality of the services. The state pays for your beautiful new building and even your Mercedes.

So what if you misdiagnose children? Who will know? Then you order yourself to provide very expensive services, which you don’t really provide.

“Some children whose first language was Chinese languished in classes taught in Spanish or Korean. Others who were supposed to receive individual tutoring were thrown into groups of four or more children, all with different types of disabilities.” Some children didn’t have any disabilities but the state was billed for them too.

So what if your revenues grew over a decade from $725,000 a year to $17 million?

That’s business.

In response to the question, “Can You Do the Wrong Thing in the Right Way?,” this teacher responded with a fascinating account of how she conquered the testing monster in her first-grade classroom.

She writes:

I’ve been thinking about testing too. A lot. I teach first grade. My students arrive at the tender age of 5 or 6 and exit at 6 or 7. I give my students 6 benchmark tests a year, 3 in literacy and 3 in math. This past year, 4 more tests were added to the roster – this time on computer. That adds up to 10 – yes 10 -multiple choice tests every year for children who still cry for their moms, pee on the carpet, fall asleep spread eagle on the floor, and poke, prod, tease, and growl at each other. Oh –did I say that the children can’t read, at least for the first third of the year –the first 3 or 4 tests?

I am told the tests are to help inform my instruction. But I know the truth. The tests are there in first grade to get the kids ready for the tests in second grade –the tests that really matter – the tests that will count on the schools’ API and AYP reports. (California tests 2nd grade).

As a pragmatist, I’m efficient, organized, hold traditional values, and like rules and order. I know how to do what is expected of me and how to show results. So I reasoned I could use these structural strengths to get the tests over with, show the expected results, meet the smart goals, so that I could move on to the creative part of teaching –the part that cannot be quantified– the part of teaching where I get to interact with the children I am charged with developing academically, I get to know their passions, fears, ideas, the part of teaching that educates children – where there are no borders between painting and reading and playing basketball and building towers and writing , the part of teaching that is magical, that combines knowledge of standards, expertise, and passion on the part of the teacher with excitement, willingness, surprise, and vision from children.

But that is not what happened. Every breathing space I created for myself and my students by my efficiency got filled up with another expectation. More students – 18 one year, 20 the next, 24 for a few years, then 26; a new policy of all-day, full inclusion of special needs children in the general education classroom; a neighborhood impacted by the housing market decline and its resultant mobile population – causing more to move in and out of my classroom during the year; a school in program improvement – in effect designated as failing, and the resultant punishments – more administrative scrutiny, narrowing of curriculum to math and reading, canceling of arts programs during the school day; flight of families to school with better scores; and noisy classrooms in buildings without connecting walls.

So I got tired. I got beaten down. I got discouraged. And if you think I had it bad, think of the kids. Imagine a teacher for them who is always cross, always serious, harps about the test, never takes the time to ask them how they are doing, is too busy to tie a shoe lace or rub a boo-boo. That is me. I cringe as I write this.

Standardized tests don’t just stop my students from thinking, they teach them not to think. Imagine a 5 year old child who doesn’t read, and may not even speak English. They look at an 8 by 11 inch white paper devoid of all but one or two sketches. They listen as I read the question to them. Then I read the 3 or 4 choices. They pick the choice and fill in the bubble. Imagine the time I spend teaching them how to find the question, scroll with their eyes through the 4 choices, all while listening to me drone on and repeat the question and the choices until all 26 of them have bubbled something in. Imagine that this one test has 8 pages of questions – 15 or 20 questions in all. No wonder I’m cross. No wonder their eyes are glazed and they are growling.

But it gets worse. I am complicit in this next part. Standardized tests actually make students stupid. Yes, stupid. Not only are the kids not thinking, they are losing the ability to think. In my zeal to get administrative scrutiny off me and my students, I mistakenly thought that if I give them the test results they want, then I could do what I know was best for my students. To that end I trained my students to do well in these tests. I taught them to look for loopholes; to eliminate and guess; to find key words; to look for clues; in short, to exchange the process of thinking for the process of manipulation. I capitalized on my knowledge of young children, and the fact that they want to please adults and like to get the answer “right”. I justified my actions by saying that I had no choice, that the consequences of low test scores at my school were too dire to contemplate, and I wasn’t willing to put myself in professional or financial jeopardy. Clearly, testing made me stupid too.

I can’t speak for all my fellow teachers at my school, but I suspect many of them would, at the very least, recognize similar behaviors in their test-teaching practices. So, when despite our best collective efforts at raising test scores failed and my school entered 2nd year program improvement, I surrendered my stupidity and started speaking up, and eventually speaking out. I read research, blogs, government publications, and journals. I read widely from educational, historical, economic, pediatric, and psychological literature. I challenged administrative authority at my school to do the same – read, think, debate, discuss, and much to my surprise, did not get rebuffed. Astonishingly, I got ignored.

At about the same time I woke up out of my testing-induced nightmare , I started to notice the monster I had helped create. My students were only happy when they got the answer right. For many years my collegues and I had noticed a trend in young children – a trend toward passivity in learning. We had theories – all the kids had TV’s in the bedrooms, they had far too much screen time – computer, games, cells, TV’s in cars, lack of adult supervision and interaction, lack of conversational models at home, lack of social models at home, the list went on. But what wasn’t on the list was what I was culpable for – I had become about the right answer. They wanted to please me. They knew that if they waited long enough I would help them find the right answer. And I did.

One day, during small group math rotation, I put up privacy boards during the practice part of a lesson on math reasoning. The story problem went like this: There are 10 buttons on my coat. 6 are red and the rest are blue. How many are blue? We have worked on these kind of problems frequently, and the children have seen them in test format. Using connecting cubes as buttons, the children had to make a model of the problem. Three kids cried that day. The stress of thinking for and by themselves got to them. You see, many of the children had become expert at copying – watching what other children did in the group to get an answer and then providing “their” answer a nanosecond later. The children did not trust themselves enough to even attempt an answer. Their discomfort was palpable, and I was appalled.

Crying notwithstanding, I continued to use privacy boards. I also started to coach the kids about my belief in their abilities. I found that as they worked out a math problem using manipulatives to represent objects, I could lean in and coach them, one to one. Then, when they all had their answers, we pushed down the privacy boards to explore what we had all done. Ever so slowly, over many weeks, they started to regain their confidence.

You might wonder why I had not been doing this kind of teaching all along. I had, 11 years ago, pre-NCLB. Testing, along with the breadth of the standards and the resulting mountain of material to cover, much of it developmentally inappropriate, slowly eroded my professional judgement. Pressure to produce results through collaboration and mind-numbing analysis sapped my energy. A constant barrage of media stories about the ineffectiveness of teachers, some of it supported by leaders at my own school, drowned my spirit. Then I heard you, Diane, speak as a guest of my district and union. I started to read your work and have never looked back.

So thank you from the bottom of my heart. You are truly brave. You inspire me to speak up and speak out. You remind me that knowledge is power –I had forgotten. Now I get my ducks in a row, collect my facts, back up my intuition and experience with research, and speak up without fear or rancor. And in the process of speaking up for myself, I speak up for my students. And ever so slowly I start to rebuild my confidence too.

This reader explains the conflict between Common Core expectations and her professional judgment. How did she resolve it? She did what she believed was in the best interests of children. It’s not easy.

She writes:

“As a literacy consultant and Title 1 coordinator at my K-6 rural NH school, I sympathize. At my school, we use Fountas and Pinnell’s Benchmark Assessment System as our universal screening tool for literacy. When F&P came out with their revised reading level expectations (obviously inspired by the CCSS, although they refuse to admit this), my colleagues and I came to consensus about the fact that we will not adhere to them, as we feel that at several grade levels (most notably kindergarten), they are developmentally inappropriate and unrealistic.

“Because we are the only elementary school in our district that came to this conclusion, I am receiving complaints from the one middle school into which all elementary students in the district funnel: “But now our grade level expectations for reading are not aligned! How are we supposed to determine which students are truly at core, strategic, intensive, etc.?”

“My stance is, do the work to figure it out. Get to know the whole child. Let’s stop pretending that each child develops at the same rate, and that it’s as easy as looking at a piece of data to determine which students truly need intervention. Policies and guidelines like this we put into place so that educators don’t have to think. It is something I work against every single day.”

In a discussion of the expectations of the Common Core, a reader offered this observation:

“Here in Clark County Nevada we have been treated to a special pep talk by our new superintendent, a 25 year veteran of the district and a former kindergarten teacher. He stated on Jon Ralston’s show that we will have to step up to meet the Common Core standards. He bluntly stated that from his experience kindergarten would be teaching what he said were 2nd and 3rd grade concepts in his time. I am glad for his honesty, but I am sure reality will intrude on his wish that children attain and perform at levels that are developmentally inappropriate. I am not sure he is enough of a bureaucrat to know he made an admission that others should amplify. Our kids aren’t stupid, our schools aren’t failing, the tests are not appropriate.”

Jonathan Pelto here follows up on his report about the high rate of suspensions of children in kindergarten.

The clincher is the closing lines, where the regional superintendent of Achievement First explains why so many children are suspended:

“The most telling remark came from Marc Michaelson, who works as the regional superintendent for Achievement First, Inc.  He told the Courant that Achievement First, has “a very high bar for the conduct of our students and that’s because we’ve made a promise to our scholars and our families that we are going to prepare them for college.”

“The “prepare them for college” statement seems more than a bit gratuitous considering the statistics he is trying to rationalize relate exclusively to children aged 6 and under.”

You can read the Hartford Courant story here:http://www.courant.com/news/education/hc-kindergarten-suspensions-20130525,0,6059434.story

This post reminds us that literature speaks to us about life in ways that informational text can never do. That is why a story like Yertle the Turtle resonates with us long after we first read it and long after the informational text has been forgotten.

The post is about a kindergarten teacher. He is worried about how the Common Core will affect the children with the greatest needs.

Guess which schools in Connecticut have the highest suspension rate for children in kindergarten?

Legislation is advancing in North Carolina that will harm the state’s underfunded public schools and strike a blow against its beleaguered teachers.

North Carolina is a right-to-work state, so there is no collective bargaining, and teachers have no voice in policy decisions about education.

Among the worst of the new bills is a proposal to fund a voucher/tax credit program, removing $90 million from public schools so that 1% of the state’s 1.5 million students may attend private and/or religious schools.

Another bill would strip away due process rights from teachers, so that teachers would have no right to a hearing if fired, no matter how many years of experience they have.

The new legislation would restrict eligibility for preschool, reducing the number of children who may enroll, and remove class size limits for some elementary grades.

Make no mistake (President Obama’s favorite expression, mine too): this legislation will save money in the short run but will cost the state far more in the long term. The Legislature is planning not only to harm public education, but to harm the children who benefit by being in preschool and in classes of reasonable size.

Former Congressman and State Superintendent Bob Etheridge said: “To the folks now running our state government in Raleigh, education reform is just another code word for cut, slash and burn.”

Governor Pat McCrory, who supports the radical anti-teacher, anti-public education agenda, has just named Eric Guckian as his Senior Education Advisor. Guckian was regional director of New Leaders in North Carolina (which recruits “transformational” leaders) and before that, was executive director of Teach for America in the state. He has been a consultant for the Gates Foundation and worked with KIPP. The following comes from the Governor’s press release:

“I am honored and humbled to serve as a member of Governor McCrory’s team,” said Guckian. “This is a critical time for education in our state, and I’m looking forward to working with committed teachers, leaders and community members to ensure that all of North Carolina’s students, regardless of circumstance, achieve an excellent education that will put them on the pathway to a better life; a life of honor, prosperity and service.”

Guckian joins John White in Louisiana and Kevin Huffman in Tennessee as TFA alumni in state-level positions serving reactionary administrations.

This was written by a teacher in Chicago:

An open letter to Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan

Dear Secretary Duncan:

Children gleefully line blocks end to end on a rug measuring its area, two girls huddle over a water table experimenting with liquid capacity, and several students use clay making sculptures as well as refining their small motor skills – this is the picture of a preschool where any of us would want to send our children.

As an early childhood educator, I was thrilled to hear President Obama’s strong focus on preschool education in the State of the Union address. We have a preponderance of research evidence that tells us quality early childhood education makes a difference in the learning lives of children, and providing expanded opportunities for parents and children is a step in the right direction.

Yet, there are many concerns as this policy unfolds.

It is understandable that when the government spends money on a program that there should be accountability to the public. It is a grave concern, however, that most of the policy you create uses standardized testing as the measure of success in education. A regimen of intensive testing is counterproductive and against developmentally appropriate early childhood practice. Children do not need to experience their first feelings of defeat at the hands of a test when they are three.

On the other hand, we have plenty of well-researched claims that can judge the quality of early childhood programs. The National Association of the Education of Young Children developed guidelines for accreditation that could easily be transformed into assessment of quality. I urge you, Secretary Duncan, to evaluate programs – not children.

Another concern is that the Department of Education promotes the use of testing data to drive instruction. Early childhood educators do not use standardized tests to guide our teaching. We use a wealth of well-founded knowledge of child development that we have accumulated over the years through highly respected psychologists and educators such as Montessori, Piaget, Erikson, and Dewey. We do not need tests to drive instruction – our instruction is driven by knowledge of childhood.

We also need to realize that high-quality early childhood education does not “just happen.” It takes skilled educators who fully understand child development and the needs of the whole child (social and emotional as well as academic). Please make sure that any government funded program insists on certified early childhood educators. Preschool should not be like elementary school for a reason, and it needs to be implemented by educators with specialized knowledge of young children.

I am sure you remember visiting your children’s preschool. Did it feel like the opening scenario of this letter? Were children joyfully playing and creating under the guidance and care of knowledgeable educators? This is the preschool we want for our nation’s children.

Signed,
Michelle Strater Gunderson
Early Childhood Committee Chairperson
Chicago Teachers Union