Showing posts with label NCLB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NCLB. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

This Week in Mathematics Education

I was given a set of bulletin board framing strips to use in the classroom. They are made by a publisher, not a teacher. Check out the red polygon. Oh by the way, recall that 'oct' means 'eight'.


A student appears in a Geometry class (10th grade). The teacher soon finds out that he/she is performing a very low level (2nd grade is the estimate). He/she doesn't know the difference between a square and a rectangle, doesn't understand the concept of 'half', and doesn't know the answer to twelve divided by three, or three divided by one. The situation is not an isolated incident. The same teacher had a student this year, enrolled in Advance Algebra, who couldn't find page one of the math book, couldn't graph a point, and also didn't know his multiplication tables.

What if Social Promotion in the elementary grades is the official policy of the school district? At what point is a student retained? Apparently not in high school. An administrator at one of the high schools said that if a kid is in the 11th grade then he/she should be in Advanced Algebra because that is the age appropriate class, even though the student hadn't passed math for years. Apparently the previous classes are not called "pre-requisites" until college.

 Also in the news, U.S. Falls Short in Measure of Future Math Teachers. In my opinion, too many American elementary school and middle school teachers are under-qualified to teach math effectively. The comment at the end of the article by Dr. Gage Kingsbury, a senior research fellow at the Northwest Evaluation Association is ludicrous.
“...to suggest that you can’t be a good middle school math teacher unless you’ve taken calculus is a leap, because calculus isn’t taught in middle school. So I think they overreach a bit.”
It is essential that a teacher have a broad understanding of mathematics to be able to effectively teach Algebra and pre-Algebra, both of which are middle school courses.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Would we fire every doctor in the emergency room?

Dear President Obama,

"Every Central Falls teacher fired", was a headline in the news this week.
"The state’s tiniest, poorest city has become the center of a national battle over dramatic school reform. On the one side, federal and state education officials say they must take painful and dramatic steps to transform the nation’s lowest-performing schools."
But, as stated in my last post, the powers-that-be, in this case the Central Falls Board of Education, fail to recognize that the best predictor of low academic performance is poverty—not bad teachers.

Imagine an impoverished, inner city, hospital emergency room. Such an emergency room will see more violent crime trauma victims than an emergency room in a middle class suburb. Continuing with the metaphor... what if the the hospital board decided to fire all of the emergency staff at the inner city hospital because there were too many gunshot and stab-wound deaths as compared to the hospitals in the suburbs? Would anyone in their right mind consider this a good solution?

It is impossible to abstract student achievement from the social environment of the school and community. It is very difficult to inculcate students into an academic environment when the environment at home doesn't support that goal and that is the least of the problem. Teachers are dealing with students who may be carrying weapons, belong to gangs, come to school malnourished, are being abused, or live in homes where people are trading in narcotics or sex. We have students who have been shot, stabbed or raped, and who know more than one person who has been murdered, students who live in group homes, or worse, on the streets.

It is appalling that teachers should have to carry the brunt of these social problems. In similar circumstances we hail our police officers and firefighters as heroes. We praise hospital emergency room staff as courageous and saintly for the work they have chosen. Yet, teachers who are working to make positive differences in our at-risk youth, are metaphorically flogged and blamed for the educational outcomes of the people they are trying to help.

Teachers, who must often dedicate precious time nursing the psychic wounds of their students, may not be able to make measurable progress in "closing the achievement gap" or increasing standardized test scores, especially when compared to the school across the bay where every student lives in a home with maids and gardeners and who are handed a school-issued Macintosh laptop in the first week of school.

Please Mr. President Obama, in eradicating NCLB can you please try to change the tone of the debate. Let's stop victimizing the teachers.

Sincerely,
Karen @ Math Me Thinks

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Letter to the President Regarding NCLB and Charter Schools

Dear President Obama,

Please read this article by Diane Ravitch from the Washington Post, entitled "Why I Changed My Mind About School Reform". Ms. Ravitch is absolutely correct in her opinion.

My favorite quote from the article,
"They* also fail to recognize that the best predictor of low academic performance is poverty—not bad teachers."
Please read the article Mr. President.

* Refers to the Obama administration, following in the footsteps of NCLB.

Sincerely,
Karen @ Math Me Thinks

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Algebra in 8th Grade Revisited

First, a fictional story about children in the state of Californialand
In Californialand swimming is a big deal. All children are expected to learn how to swim.

Some children start learning to swim when they are young. Maybe they have swimming pools in their back yards or the family has a beach house. Maybe they belong to the swim club. Some of these children even get to take swim lessons. They become very proficient swimmers and may even be on a swim team.

Other children don't have the same exposure to pools and beaches. But maybe the grandparents or the neighbors down the block have a pool. These children get intermittent exposure so don't have the same developed abilities as the children previously mentioned. They usually learn to tread water and dog paddle but they don't have developed swim strokes.

Other kids have minimal exposure to pools and beaches. Sometimes their parents are even afraid of the water and that fear is passed on to their children. Although these children may wade in shallow water, they really are not skilled swimmers and would not be considered "water safe".

Then a new law is passed in the state. All kids aged 12 years 9 months to 13 years 8 months must be thrown in the deep end of the pool to be tested for their ability to swim. They will either pass or fail.

It does not take an expert to predict what happens. The kids on the swim team, those with pools in their back yards, and those who take swimming lessons pass the test at an advanced level. They are ready for scuba lessons, ocean surfing, or the synchronized swim team.

Others, who get some exposure to pools and beaches, do fairly well. They do not have the stamina to swim 10 laps or do rigorous water sports but at least they are ready for the next level swim lesson.

Some kids can barely dog paddle to the side while their parents nervously watch with vicarious spasms of fear. No one can really say these are proficient swimmers and alas they fail the test.

And then there are still the few kids who have to be rescued while they panic and are not even able to tread water.

It is too bad that the Californialand Board of Swimming Proficiency, does not think to make sure that all kids are at least proficient swimmers before throwing them in the deep end of the pool.

But the state's rationale, according to the Governor, it that not exposing all children to the deep end of the pool by 8th grade, creates an equity issue. All kids should have the exposure to swimming in deep water by 8th grade otherwise, in their way of thinking, they won't be able to be on the swim team or learn to surf, and how fair would that be? So, throw the kids in the deep end and give them the exposure. No one could ever accuse the Governor of not providing education equity to all students.

The flaw in logic is that equity does not start in the eighth grade. To throw kids who do not know how to swim into the deep end is not equitable. It is trying to fix the problem with the wrong tool.
Back to Reality

Most thinking and compassionate people do not throw their children in the deep end of the pool to teach them to swim. But the State Board of Education, with the Governor's urging, has decided to throw all eight graders into Algebra.

Here is what some of the people on the National Mathematics Advisory Panel had to say about California's new policy, taken from the article entitled, Math Experts Question Wisdom of Calif. Algebra Rule, in Education Week:

Tom Loveless, Ph.D. in education, M.A. in special education, and an A.B. in English, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Director of the Brown Center on Education Policy, classroom teacher for 9 years -
“It’s a shortsighted policy that confuses taking a course with learning. The state has not been serious about preparing kids for algebra—they’re just throwing it on the schools. It’s absolutely far-fetched." Also, policymakers there [California] were wrongly assuming that simply enrolling students in 8th grade algebra will result in more of them becoming proficient in the subject. An examination of students’ math course-taking and test performance shows that premise to be false.
Vern Williams, B.S. math education, teacher for 37 years, Math Counts Coach, teacher of the year Virginia 1990 -
California schools, when faced with the reality that many of their 8th graders are not ready for Algebra 1, will simply water down those courses and craft classes that are Algebra 1 “in name only.” Some students, even motivated ones, are not ready for algebra until 9th grade. By forcing students into that class early, schools risk not only discouraging struggling learners, but also holding back higher-achievers, who have to wait for classmates to catch up.“Sometimes, it’s strictly the [lack of] math preparation, but also, there are just kids, even bright kids who ... need to be exposed to a bit more math in 8th grade, or to a pre-algebra course.”
Skip Fennell, President of NCTM, B.S., M.S., PhD (bio did not mention subject), classroom teacher, Maryland outstanding mathematics teacher of the year 1997 -
“I’m all about raising standards, but I wouldn’t want to legislate that every 8th grader take a course in Algebra 1." When it comes to that course, we need to provide access—to kids who are ready.” The math panel’s final report recommended that schools move more students into 8th grade algebra—but only if they had received thorough preparation in whole numbers, fractions, and other concepts.
Russell M. Gersten, Executive Director of Instructional Research Group, PhD special education, nationally recognized expert in both quantitative and qualitative research and evaluation methodologies, with an emphasis on translating research into classroom practice -
California officials would be better off focusing on math preparation at early grades and making sure that courses called “algebra” offer authentic algebra. “The reality is that a lot of kids fail algebra. If anything, [that] makes them math-aversive.”

From the other point of view:

Theodore R. Mitchell, President of the California Board of Education, PhD history of American education, M.A. history, B.A. economics and history, college professor and administrator, congressional adviser -
“The research has been pretty clear that Algebra 1 is a gateway course. We wanted to make it clear we’re going to give all kids the opportunity to go through the gateway. We will not have a two-tier system in middle schools. We’ve been doing a terrific job of getting more kids into algebra. We see this less as a hammer than as urging the state to get across the finish line. The good news is we’ve never heard this level of conversation about what it will take.”
Matthew M. Gardner, the president and chief executive officer of BayBio, an association representing more than 400 Northern California life-sciences companies with 60,000 employees -
“The industry’s view is that California’s science and math education is falling behind. We should expect more from the kids in our school system and from the system itself.”
Arnold , Governor of California, actor, body builder (was unable to find details of education) -
“To do otherwise, would lower our expectations and continue to divide our children between those we believe in and those we leave behind."
I think the Governor is using rhetoric to scare people. The whole notion of "no child left behind", at its foundation, has little to do with school or curriculum. The number one indicator of how children do in school is zip code: where kids live and the wealth of their families.

If we want to ensure that kids are going to be prepared to compete in the global market we need to address inequities such as: Two parents working full time at Wal Mart do not make enough to live in the community where they work. They do not have enough money for the rent, the car, car insurance, car maintenance, clothing, good nutritional food, basic medical care, putting money away for retirement, let alone the computer so that the kids can do their school reports, or the internet so they have the same access to information that their wealthy counter parts have. Yet the CEOs of big companies receive severance packages, after only a few years of work, that blow my mind. THAT is inequity.

Until that kind of inequity is addressed, the poor kids will do poorly and the wealthy ones will be just fine.

Related posts: California requires Algebra 1 for all eighth-graders
California Dropout Rate and Money

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Closing the Achievement Gap - An Impossible Feat

The Fordham Institute released a new study today: High-Achieving Students in the Era of NCLB. The study consists of two parts:

Part 1 - An Analysis of NAEP Data
(The National Assessment of Educational Progress)
Part 2 - Results From a National Teacher Survey

Part 1 finds that although the rate of achievement has increased for the lowest 10% of students, the rate has remained virtually flat for the top 10% of students. Part 2 finds that the majority of teachers report that "low-achieving students receive dramatically more attention" than their high-achieving counterparts, yet the majority of teachers "believe that all students deserve equal attention". The majority of teachers (especially those in the nation's lowest-income schools) recommended that advanced students be in homogeneous classes, or magnet schools that bring advanced students together. (...so much for the concept of "de-tracking", ubiquitously taught in teacher training programs!)

According to the report summery, the pattern of bigger gains for low achieving students and lesser gains for high achieving students is "associated with the introduction of accountability systems". The term "accountability systems" refers to student testing "regimes" in general, and specifically to the accountability system of NCLB.

A New York Times article cited Amy Wilkins, a vice president at Education Trust, an education lobbying group:
“My concern is that this report makes it seem like we have to choose between seeking equity and excellence,” she said. “We need to strive for both.”
What? Of course we need to strive for both. The report is saying that it is not occurring, and it does not occur in the "high stakes" testing environment of NCLB.

From the Education Trust Web Site (italics added):
Mission Statement

The Education Trust works for the high academic achievement of all students at all levels, pre-kindergarten through college, and forever closing the achievement gaps that separate low-income students and students of color from other youth. Our basic tenet is this — All children will learn at high levels when they are taught to high levels.

What We Do

The Education Trust advances its mission along several fronts, from raising its voice in national and state policy debates to helping teachers improve instruction in their classrooms. Regardless of where it occurs, our work maintains a relentless focus on improving the education of all students, and particularly those students whom the system has traditionally left behind.
Closing the achievement gap is impossible (see explanation below). The gap can only be practically decreased by helping the lower achieving students, intensively, from birth. The achievement gap is a massive cultural problem that will not be solved by putting pressure on teachers to improve.

Closing the Achievement Gap

These graphs are hypothetical representations of learning achievement. They are for elucidation purposes only and do not represent actual data.


The assumptions are that at birth (age 0) children know virtually nothing and by the time they are age 15 there is an achievement gap between the upper 10% of students and the lower 10% of students.

Graph 1 is a baseline representation. The top 10% of students are achieving at at faster rate (steeper slope) than the bottom 10% of students. The distance between the two graphs at age 15, represents the "achievement gap".

In graphs 2 and 3, the achievement gap has narrowed from the base line graph. In graph 2 the top students' achievement rate remained constant, but the lower 10% of students achieved at a faster rate than in the base line graph. In Graph 3, the the achievement rate of the lower 10% of students remained constant, but the achievement rate for the top 10% of students declined.

In graph 4, the rate of achievement for both groups increased. The rate of increase doubled (increased by 100%) for the lowest students but only increased by 50% for the highest students. Even though the rate of achievement was twice as much for the lower students, the gap remained the same.

A major problem with the NCLB act, is that it is narrowly focussed. It assesses student achievement with testing, then focuses on overall school performance and teacher improvement. This has put an impossible burden on teachers. Administrators come under scrutiny by the public when test scores indicate that a school needs to improve. They, in turn, put pressure on the teachers? It would be interesting to see if the NCLB correlates with an increased number of teachers fleeing the profession.



Sunday, June 1, 2008

Congress and the National Mathematics Advisory Panel

In April 2006, George Bush commissioned the National Mathematics Advisory Panel to investigate why the U.S. continues to drop in rank in world standing in regards to math education and make recommendations on how to redevelop the nation's competitive edge in mathematics education. On March 13, 2008, the Panel released the report of their findings.

The House Education and Labor Committee held a Full Committee Hearing to examine the National Mathematic Advisory Panel's report. The Committee heard testimony from members of the Panel and on Wednesday, May 21, 2008, released that testimony, in written and video form.

Representative George Miller (D - CA), Chairperson of the Hearing, said in his opening statement that the Committee was going to focus on two areas of the Panel's report. One: Raise math standards and revise curriculum to include fewer topics explored at greater depth. Two: Provide teachers with better training; teachers can't teach what they do not know.

The "Wow! You've got to be kidding!" moment came when I heard Rep. Miller state that George Bush was suspending participation in the next Trends In Math and Science Study (TIMSS). TIMSS is one of the main tools used to provide reliable data on the mathematics achievement of the nation's students compared to those in other countries. TIMSS data has been collected in 1995, 1999, 2003, and 2007. TIMSS 2007 results will be released on December 9, 2008.

The main motivation for forming the Math Panel in 2006 (a good idea from Bush!) was about how to improve the nation's competitive edge in mathematics in the 21st century global economy. The U.S. ranks 25th out of 29 developed nations (not good) for 15 year-olds in mathematics education, unacceptable especially in view of the international leadership status of the U.S. TIMSS was one of the necessary tools used by the Math Panel to compare the nation's math education to that of other countries.

Although Rep. Miller said he was disappointed that Bush had suspended participation in the next TIMSS, he did not give a reason for Bush's decision. I can only wonder: Perhaps the NCLB Act hasn't been as successful at the Bush Administration purports.

Sunday, May 4, 2008

The Lake Woebegone Effect

I have written about, what I call, the “Lake Woebegone” Effect (LWE). Lake Woebegone is the name of the mythical town, in Garrison Keillor’s weekly radio show, where “all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.” In my definition, LBE is when we, as parents, are not able to stand to know that our child isn’t above average. Of course this is impossible. From the meaning of average, for any criteria of a given population, 50% of the population falls below the average mark, and 50% of the population is above the average mark.

We regularly sing the praises of accomplished school athletes. We award them with trophies and ribbons. Everyone understands that if you can't play well enough, you don't make it onto the team. We all know that in any team that is truly competing, the best players play most often and the others sit on the bench. I watched many games where the top players on the team play most of the game and the others fill in when: There is an injury, when a player is tired, or when the team is so far ahead of the other team that it does not make a difference one way or the other. For a laugh see No Child Left Behind: The Football Version.

It is an entirely different mind set when it comes to our children in the classroom. Some may recall when C was the average grade. This is no longer true. Since we, as a culture, cannot stand for our children to be average, let alone below average, they must at least earn a B, if not an A. We, as a nation, believe that it is more important to pass a student to the next level than to retain a student because it would hurt his or her feelings, and therefore ours as parents, if the child were to fail.

We are graduating huge numbers of students from high school who are functionally illiterate and innumerate. The California High School Exit Exam only tests students at an 8th grade level in Math and English. It is our fault, when we don't stand up for excellency in schools. We protest when our own children fall below the C level. We blame it on the teachers, we complain to the administrators, and hence we have the LBE. The result is that our schools march toward mediocrity. And we don't understand why our nation's sophomores rank 24th of 29 developed nations.

Jacques Barzun, refers to the idea of LBE (but he didn’t call it that) in his 1991 book Begin Here: The forgotten Conditions of Teaching and Learning. He says that we that through our choices, as a nation, we have lost the “knack of… Teaching and Learning.”

“Take one familiar fact: everybody keeps calling for Excellence - excellence not just in schooling, throughout society. But as soon as somebody or something stands out as Excellent, the other shout goes up: ‘Elitism!’… ‘Standing out’ is undemocratic.”

In 1986, John Jacob Cannell, MD published, what later became known as, the “Lake Woebegone” Reports. Alas, it turns out that LBE wasn’t original. The doctor from West Virginia started wondering how the mostly poor students of his state could do so well on nationally standardized tests. In the first report he documented “all fifty states were testing above the national average in elementary achievement and concluded the testing infrastructure in America’s public schools was corrupt.” In the second report he, “delineated the systematic and pervasive ways that American educators cheat on standardized achievement tests.” Ouch!

I earned a teaching credential in 1993 and have never heard of either report even though both of his reports were “extensively discussed in academic journals, and helped spur the testing reform movement.” As a teacher, I was largely unaware that there was extensive cheating on the standardized tests, even though a number of years ago, when the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was introduced, spurred by George W. Bush, my brother in witty irony, sent me an article about the rampant cheating on standardized tests by educators and administrators in Texas. There is even a name for this type of cheating: Campbell’s Law – Who Knew?

Campbell’s Law basically says that the higher the stakes in testing, the more likely corruption occurs. Isn't it amazing that this was also never discussed in credential school, nor by any administrator I have known, and I have been teaching for 15 years?

In 2006, John Jacob Cannell published “‘Lake Woebegone”: Twenty Years Later” where he explains why he left the testing reform movement and goes into detail about the reason the NCLB testing is no different than what occurred with standardized testing twenty years ago. I highly recommend reading it.

feed count