Posts Tagged ‘low-performing schools’

Dodge the Bar or Leap the Hurdle?

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

Teachers know that school programs come and go.  No wonder they roll their eyes and say just wait it out.  I can verify this claim.  I was a long time teacher and have seen plenty of “new” programs, solutions for any difficulty possible to name.

However, the one worthy mandate of the original No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation is that schools across the nation are required to be accountable for student success.  First implemented in 2001, that’s a long, long time ago in the K-12 education world.

Of course, little federal money was authorized to assure the mandate’s success.  States chose from a myriad of assessment tools.  Each state decided at which point students were considered proficient in reading and math.  School districts were left to come up with teacher training and the models of curriculum and instruction to help students succeed.

All those hurdles were enshrined in the NCLB Act during eight years when legislatures were in a constant budget struggle to find funds to support public education.

Until now, many states did the minimum, as has been reported in numerous news articles, so few comparisons have been made to see how children across the nation are doing.  For example, proficiency was set at a ridiculously low level.  The selected assessment tools were poorly designed and offered little information.  Teachers were not provided training to analyze assessment results and plan lessons to improve student achievement.

In spite of the urge to dodge the bar, a number of states and schools and school districts managed to set high standards and show success, especially important in low-performing schools found in neighborhoods with many students “at risk.”  Homelessness, second language issues, and low income levels all set obstacles for student success.

Slowly, with conscientious support at the district level and competent, relentless school personnel, student levels of achievement improved and will continue to improve as long as all components that support the outcomes are kept in place.

We should be relieved that some schools took on the challenge and leaped the hurdles.  Now that models of success have come to the fore, the education community must not let go.

I looked at studies of three models in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Cincinnati Public Schools, and Hamilton, Tennessee, all of which are good, if not perfect, examples of schools making progress.  Such schools, found in neighborhoods across the country, do not use the exact same curriculum, or have the same daily schedule, or rely on the same organization of staff.

They do all have certain components of attitude, teacher collaboration, professional development, and parent and community support.  They can demonstrate how students have achieved.  That’s being accountable.

If interested, the website for the Consortium for Policy Research in Education (five universities pooling resources) is filled with articles that address studies and research about successful schools.  Search for articles on ‘accountability.’

THE TEST

Thursday, May 14th, 2009

It may be called summative assessment in field studies and research, but I know, and every teacher in my school knows, it is THE TEST.

In my fourth grade, five mornings were set aside in the beginning of May for THE TEST, also called the California Standards Test, a criterion referenced assessment written just for California students based on the standards taught in reading and math and used to identify the school’s Annual Yearly Progress, authorized by the No Child Left Behind Act.

In fact, every California public school child, grade 2 to grade 11, got to pick up a pencil and make dark bubbles.

On day one, my students took the practice test, so they were familiar with the test format.  In fourth grade, they must read the test questions in the booklet, but fill in a bubble on an answer sheet.  That’s a skill all in itself and, believe me, the class has filled in many bubbles, not just with the practice test provided by the state testing department.  Of course, you know this, if you’ve been teaching.

Then on day 2, they read passages and analyzed sentences and read more text until, in my view, their eyes crossed.  It’s a long test filled with spelling rules, punctuation and other writing conventions, grammar, and on and on and on.

Then on day 3, at my school another testing section was devoted to more reading, comparing stories, analyzing correct writing skills.  Another morning with a lot of rubbing heads and rolling shoulders to get the kinks out after hunching over their booklets for more than an hour and a half.

That’s all, folks…for the first week.  Two more days the following week were devoted to THE TEST.

Big change on day 4.  The test switched to math which my class tackled with enthusiasm, being high-achieving math lovers.  Well, most of them, but there were some who showed signs of fatigue, a few finishing way too soon, the signal for random filling-in-the-bubbles.

The last day, was more math.  The kids pulled out their rulers and scratch paper.  They turned the test pages sideways to see if that helped them compare polygons.  I forgot to say the class gets snacks each day, the idea being that food helps keep your energy up.  Gummy bears disappeared with abandon.

Then time was up and everyone went out to recess.  No more summative assessment for this year.  Unless a child was absent on one or more test days.  She would not be forgotten.  Someone would sit her down to read and calculate.  I don’t know about the 30 kids in my class, but I was relieved.  And grabbed some gummy bears on my way out to yard duty.

Before school this morning, the day after the last school-wide assessment day, I read an article about turning around 5000 low-performing schools in the nation (San Francisco Chronicle, “Obama wants to turn around…”, May 13, 2009).  How does the Department of Education know a school is low-performing?  From performance on THE TEST.

How has your school been doing?