Category Archives: Best Practices

A Look at Class in an Urban Middle School (Lecture)

The Wisconsin-Spencer Lecture Series on Education presents

“They Don’t Know What They Don’t Know”
A Look at Class in an Urban Middle School

Adriane Williams, Dissertator
Educational Policy Studies

In this talk, Adriane Williams will discuss research she has conducted in an urban middle school, where she has observed a lack of “genuineness” in school administrators’ communications with students’ parents who do not have college experience themselves. The primary implication of her research is that the school administrators lack commitment to involving the parents of prospective first-generation college students in education planning in part due a lack of awareness of how critical a role parents play in the process.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007
3:00pm – 4:00pm
220 Teacher Education Building
Light refreshments will be served.

~~~All lectures are free and open to the public.~~~

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Local News

Dept. of Education “What Works” Clearinghouse Rates Reading Recovery Highly

Here’s a link to a detailed article on how Reading Recovery has been rated highly by the rigorous Dept. of Education’s Institute on Educational Sciences “What Works” Clearinghouse.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/03/28/29recovery.h26.html?
For those who are really interested in evidence-based practices in education, keeping updated on the “What Works” clearinghouse is a great way to determine what is rigorously researched and tested in classrooms.

The article goes into depth on almost every aspect of Reading Recovery, including the fact that some criticisms were based not on its efficacy, but on its overall cost…some reading experts believe it doesn’t have to be a 1-on-1 approach…Jack Fletcher is quoted and is one of the foremost reading experts in the country. His work is well worth reading for those interested in literacy issues.

Like any issue, there are no simple solutions and no single answers that will work best for every student. But this article has some good discussion about both the merits and the barriers to different reading approaches.

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices

Observations, Endorsements

 

There has been much talk on the campaign trail about the need for a “cost benefit” analysis and the lack of forward planning. I find it disturbing that some of our candidates seem unaware of the 2002 Functional Analysis that MMSD commissioned from Virchow, Krause & Company, LLP. At that time, the district realized that the flawed state finance system would force cuts in the years ahead and wanted to be prepared. Because we have the analysis, we are prepared (nearly as well) as we can be for the challenges of the yearly budgeting.

I’m glad that this was commissioned and we have it to use. However, we all need to be careful and understand that all educational research and data is contingent, contextual and only provides guidance for decision-making. The factors that make a student achieve or fail are so complex and interactive that attributing causality is at best a matter of likelihood, not certainty. Some of the most important things, like the smile on a teacher’s face, defy quantification. Additionally, all the measures we use are to one degree or another subjective and flawed (see Fair Test for one set of examples). It isn’t science and applying the positivism of science and related reliance on “expertise” to education can be dangerous.

I value data and research as tools to inform educational policy, but I know that human judgment is the final and most important quality that we need on the Board of Education. This is one reason why I am supporting Beth Moss, Marjorie Passman and Johnny Winston Jr. in the April 3d Election. They are knowledgeable about our district and community, open to using data and research and have displayed the kind of judgement we need to keep our schools strong and getting stronger.

Thomas J. Mertz

2 Comments

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, Elections, Local News

Accountability Frankenstein Published

The long awaited (at least in my house) book from Sherman Dorn is now available for order. There will be a series of podcasts from the book, the first is here. This is what the publisher has to say:

Accountability Frankenstein
Understanding and Taming the Monster

Sherman Dorn
University of South Florida

To understand the current moment in school accountability, one must understand the larger contradictions in education politics. Accountability Frankenstein provides a broader perspective on the school accountability debate by exploring the contradictions inherent in high-stakes testing. Accountability Frankenstein explains the historical and social origins of test-based accountability: the political roots of accountability, why we trust test scores while we distrust teachers, the assumptions behind formulaic accountability systems, and the weaknesses with the current carrot-and-stick approach to motivating teachers.

Accountability Frankenstein answers the questions of educators and parents who want to understand the origins of accountability. This book challenges the beliefs of fierce advocates and opponents of highstakes testing. It provides a rescue plan for accountability after the failures of high-stakes testing, a plan to make accountability smart, democratic, and real.

CONTENTS: Acknowledgments. Preface. 1. The Political Origins of Accountability. 2. Trusting Tests. 3. How Trustworthy are Test Scores. 4. Setting up Goals and Failure. 5. Consequential Thinking. 6. A Better Way. References.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Accountability, AMPS, Best Practices, No Child Left Behind

Nan Youngerman on REACH

At the MUAE forum to discuss education for gifted and talented students, it was disturbing to hear one candidate, Maya Cole for Seat #5, talk about eliminating REACH as a way to trade money to keep Eastside schools open. I was bothered on many levels.

One; REACH was developed to provide one additional and desperately needed hour of planning time for elementary teachers. It is in this hour that teachers might differentiate curriculum or do hundreds of other necessary tasks to keep their classrooms going. This precious hour, one of about a total of five permitted during the work week, is a negotiated term or part of the Teacher Bargaining Agreement. Maya Cole is suggesting it be eliminated. If this were possible, simply by saying it —- is not a friendly gesture to teachers. This will not save money. A different method of providing for children during the negotiated hour of planning time would need to be developed. Claiming to know what would help teachers and then suggesting to take away their planning time is down right nasty. Elementary planning time is beyond necessary for teacher sanity and is is the very basic component of being a thoughtful and reflective teacher!

On a second level, this was a disturbing suggestion made at a forum where the main topic was gifted and talented education. The original intent of REACH, when developed in the early nineties, was to promote curiosity, creativity, problem solving, cooperative learning and about six other similar criteria. In many instances these key aspects of REACH have been lost, but I rather hear about returning to these ideals to promote the giftedness in every child than hear about eliminating the program entirely at a forum of this nature.

Respectfully submitted, Nan Youngerman

Veteran teacher, parent, Madison community member, member of Teacher Bargaining Committee, 1990 committee for Elementary Planning, 1990 Committee to Design REACH Program and WI Presidential Teacher of Excellence

I took the liberty of uploading one of Ms Youngerman’s publications (linked to her name) so all can see what teachers who are given the time and tools can accomplish.

Thomas J. Mertz

5 Comments

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Elections, Local News

Gifted Issues

Excerpts from Reaching Gifted Children (Education Week chat) Guests: Karen Isaacson and Tamara Fisher, the co-authors of Intelligent Life in the Classroom—Smart Kids & Their Teachers

On Self Advocacy:

…I tell my kids that if they are going to self-advocate, they need to follow the 3 P’s: 1) Be polite (don’t say “this is boring.” 2) Do it in private (not in front of the rest of the class.) And 3) Provide proof (that they’ve actually mastered the content.)

On Mixed Ability Classrooms:

Question from Pat Cernadas, Middle School EFL teacher:
How can gifted children benefit from a mixed abilities classroom like the ones I have in my school?

Karen Isaacson:
They can learn to appreciate other children’s gifts! They can also learn how different abilities and different gifts compliment each other.

On Under Identification of Minorities (Not much help here and I found the statement “I suppose it does happen” offensive as a near dismissal of a well documented and serious problem – tjm):

I’m not sure what to suggest. I suppose it does happen, but I feel grateful not to have encountered much of that in my district. I suppose changing those low expectations may take a gradual process that would include their coming to know a gifted minority student and then extrapolating out that yes, there are gifted students of such-and-such minority. I wish I had more ideas to offer you on that portion of your question. Perhaps with new identification methods, this obstacle can be overcome.

On Pull Outs:

Question from Vicki Templet, mom of three and former teacher:
What is your opinion on the way schools label children as Talented and Gifted, pulling them out of regular class for a full day every week? Is the special service worth the labeling stigma, especially in the elementary grades?

Karen Isaacson:
Yes, the special service is worth it, in my opinion. One of the biggest needs of these children is to have an opportunity to meet together with other children to whom they can relate. I do think some care should be taken as to how the label is handled and the feelings of the individual child. In our elementary school, we refer to the program as “Extended Studies.” This seems to work well.

More on Differentiation and Pull Outs:

Tamara Fisher:
…The kinds of services provided by pull-out programs varies greatly, so one would need to look into just what kind of pull-out services a particular school/program offered to know if it would be appropriate for a particular gifted student. Nonetheless, pull-out programs can often have the flexibility to adapt to differing student needs, and they are a great means by which to work with gifted students on social/emotional needs. Inclusion with differentiation by the teacher is an equally viable option, provided the teacher has had some training in just what to do. (Most teachers don’t learn these strategies in college, at least not in relation to how they apply to gifted students, so some assistance in the beginning is realistic to plan on.) I have found that once teachers begin differentiating, most of them love it and wish they had known how to do it all along. One great thing about differentiation in the classroom is that it is good for all kids, meaning not just the gifted students benefit from it.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices

Fins know secrets to school success

AMPS listserv member Lisa Pugh sent out this article from the recent U.S. News and World Report about why the Fins are leading the world in educational success for their students while also having the smallest achievement gap in the world.

What are they doing that we could learn from? They have:

— Scrapped their tracking system and developed heterogeneous classrooms grades 1-9;
— Given local schools great autonomy in choosing supplies, curriculum, etc.
— Kept class size relatively small.
— Offered universal preschool.
— Made teaching a high-status, advanced-degree profession to equip and attract the best teachers.

Beth Swedeen

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices

Educating the Whole Child

Excerpt from TeacherKen (posted here and here)

As a teacher I know that what occurs in my classroom is a small part of educating my students, even in my own domain of social studies. As a music major who teaches government and also coaches soccer, it has always been clear to me that school is about far more that mere intellectual development. History is replete with examples of the damage done when we develop the intellect and fail to develop behavior, morality, concern for others, physical awareness, and so on. And in a liberal democracy (for those two words are an accurate description in political science terms of our form of government) we should not be attempting to force all students to be the same – our society is enriched and enlivened by our variety and our differences, and our educational practices should be informed by an awareness of the importance of and respect for those differences.

The post is about a report from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Reading the post and the report, I was struck by how many of the ideas and approaches are similar to the work of the MMSD Equity Task Force. For example, the report calls for “cooperative effort by communities, schools, and teachers, each responsible for providing part of the necessary context,” and the charges to each include:

Communities:

family support and involvement
Government, civic, and business support and resources

Schools:

challenging and engaging curriculum
a safe, healthy, orderly, and trusting environment
a climate that supports strong relationships between adults and students

Teachers:

evidence-based assessment and instructional practices
rich content and an engaging learning climate
student and family connectedness

The Equity Task Force draft guidelines include:

Create a climate that welcomes and values all students, families, and community members.

Engage families and community members in schools, children’s education, and the success of all students.

Challenge teachers and students to develop an appreciation for all cultures and to learn to thrive in a multicultural society.

Make opportunities and resources available for teachers and staff to promote recognition that students must take different roads to learn.

Adopt consistently rigorous, culturally inclusive, evidence-based curriculum, and teaching and assessment practices district-wide.

The Equity Task Force is currently scheduled to present to the Board of Education on April 9th.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Equity, Local News

Finally, a big bright light to shine on Reading First

Coverage in today’s NYT of yesterday’s Congressional hearing on the Reading First program saw Education Secretary Margaret Spellings defending the program that has been plagued by accusations that states were steered toward a handful of commercial reading programs and testing instruments. Madison was the focus of a recent Times article outlining some of the program’s problems and why our district declined Reading First money.

Money quote from today’s reporting comes from Robert Slavin of Johns Hopkins University, whose Success for All reading program was shut out of many states under Reading First. He said “he did not think the secretary’s promises went far enough. “I haven’t seen the slightest glimmer of even intention to change,” Dr. Slavin said.

Because schools had already chosen their readng curriculums, promises to clean up Reading First now meant little, he said. He compared them to finding eight innings into a baseball game with a score of 23 to 0 that the opposing team had been playing with cork bats.

“Then they say, ‘From now on, we’re using honest bats.’ ” Dr. Slavin said. “I’m sorry, it’s 23 to nothing. You can’t just say, ‘From now on.’ ” “

Robert Godfrey

1 Comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Local News, National News, No Child Left Behind

Truthiness in Education

Most reports from education policy think tanks are not worth the paper on which they are printed, according to a new education policy research center called “The Think Tank Review Project,” a collaborative research project at the University of Colorado at Boulder and Arizona State University. It seeks to review reports from think tanks and to comment on their research methods, reliability, and validity.

The worst offenders, according to the Project, are the Arlington, Virginia-based Lexington Institute, the Washington-based Thomas B. Fordham Institute, the Harvard Program for Education Policy and Governance (PEPG), and the New York City-based Manhattan Institute. These think tanks, according to reviewers, published reports that were “selectively data-mined” and “seriously lacking in methodological rigor.” To list a few charges, Welner and Molnar criticized these organizations for their presentation of “conclusions that their own data and analyses flatly contradicted” and also for their “resolute use of statistics to achieve a desired outcome.” You can read the report here.

Robert Godfrey

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices