The Miracle Workers

In the book, The Miracle Worker, Helen Keller overcomes all odds and succeeds in becoming a contributing member of society with the 24/7 one-on-one help of her very determined teacher, Annie Sullivan. As the title suggests, a miracle is not an everyday occurrence, but a once-in-a-lifetime thing, something that happens despite terrible hardships or impossible situations. A miracle is a rarity, and the Catholic Church attributes them to the intervention of saints.

 

Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, must believe that the teachers of America are all saints, capable of delivering miracles daily, but especially during standardized test time. In his proposed changes to the IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Mr. Duncan wants to assure the public that there are no obstacles to Special Ed children reaching the goals of the new Common Core State Standards tests, the ones that “regular” kids are overwhelmingly expected to fail this year and next. Mr. Duncan expects every child with disabilities, physical, learning or emotional, to score in the proficient range on an above-grade standardized test, one that is offered with very few accommodations other than small group testing and extended time.

 

Good teachers can help the learning disabled kids make good progress, but since they cannot be identified as Special Ed unless they are at least 2 years behind, it’s ridiculous to expect such children to “ace the test.” Some may indeed, eventually catch up due to the right combination of in-school and at-home support. When I taught remedial math, there was a full-time learning disabled student who came to me for extra math instruction because she was heads above her special ed class in math. After 2 years we were able to mainstream her entirely for math because she was forging ahead of most kids in her grade in math. She ended up scoring at a proficient level on the state test in math. Reading, however, was not her forte, and she remained in her learning disabled category for Language Arts during the time she was with us.

 

Some kids are not going to make that kind of progress no matter what you try. I taught siblings in a family of mentally challenged kids and adults. Although I was able to help two of the kids who had an IQ of 47 and 55 respectively, their abilities in Grade 8 were far below what would be tested on the state test at this point. Think about a child being forced to take a 2-hour test in reading and in math on an 8^th grade level when their reading and math levels were at a 2^nd grade level. Algebra versus 2 digit subtraction, close reading of historical documents from the 18^th century versus memorizing 200 sight words because phonics is impossible with your auditory perception problem.

 

Kids like the siblings in Special Ed are now able to take a modified version of the standardized test that is shorter and with alternative assessments and accommodations. Some kids actually score basic and proficient using these alternative methods and assessments! But Mr. Duncan is currently seeking to modify that to require only the most severely affected students to take the test. Students identified with learning disabilities such as dyslexia (visual misperceptions of words), dyscalculia (inability to work with numbers) and dysgraphia (inability to write legibly) will be considered not severe enough and have to take the 6 hours of ELA and Math tests at their grade level, despite performing at levels 4 or more grades below. Plus, their teachers, schools, districts and states will be penalized if they don’t score well.

 

Huffington Post’s Joy Resmovits puts it this way:

After years of holding states accountable under the law for such things as timely evaluations of students and due process hearings, the Education Department plans to look at results. For the first time, the government will define compliance with the law not just in terms of what states do for students with disabilities, but with how those students perform… According to this new results-driven accountability framework, states will be responsible for students with disabilities' participation in state tests, gaps in proficiency between students with disabilities and their peers, and performance on the National Assessment of Education Progress, or NAEP, the only national standardized test.

 

I don’t understand what the US Department of Education doesn’t understand about being in Special Ed. The reason a child is identified as such, is because they are performing at a level 2 or more years below their peers. If they were able to take the test and pass, they wouldn’t be in Special Ed!

 

The new portion of the IDEA law will put punitive measures into effect for those states that do not meet their goals for Special Ed students. If a state fails to meet goals three years in a row, a portion of their federal money for Special Ed services can be withheld. That’s puzzling, since what is the likelihood of being able to meet their goal in the fourth year without adequate funding? As far as I can see it, the federal government is setting up the cash-strapped districts for failure. Most money-starved districts have already had to cut back on extra personnel and service that would make it easier for students with IEPs to come closer to grade level. Classroom assistants and specialized reading programs have been reduced. Look at the Philadelphia School District that has had to cut personnel three years in a row, and is working on a bare-bones budget that doesn’t deliver the needed services to its students. There is 1000:1 ratio of counselors to students, 44 schools are getting counseling services one day every three weeks. There is a dearth of librarians, social workers, assistant principals, and materials and supplies. And the federal government wants to up the ante for special ed students? Until fair funding formulae are commonplace, the number of support services for students correlates directly with the funds available (or not).

 

Let’s employ some honest-to-goodness special ed teachers in advisory positions in the Department of Education to determine which pieces of the curriculum and which accommodations will be reasonable to use for their IEP students. Instead, we have a Secretary who has never taught, touting a curriculum written mostly by corporate testing people, not real teachers, a common core curriculum that has never been field tested, and regulations that no teacher worth their special ed certification would agree to. We have politicians and pundits, despite never having been competent K-12 teachers, who KNOW what teachers need to do to serve their students.

 

Sorry, I can’t buy it. We need policy makers with common sense who have the best interests of the children and their schools in mind, not the policy makers we currently have who never had the common sense to begin with.

 

We can’t work miracles with every child. Miracles are the exception. We are not Arne Duncan's Miracle Workers.

 

IDEA – What is it?
http://nichcy.org/laws/idea/partb

Arne Duncan’s Makeover of Special Ed

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/24/idea-compliance-2014_n_5524196.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000020&ir=Education

 

Still learning!

My Common Core FAQ Part 1

Please read this piece of much misinformation first and then you can read my thoughts. I am just answering 14 questions today, more for tomorrow. I can probably write a whole blog entry on question #15.

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/05/27/307755798/the-common-core-faq?ft=1&f=1013#q3

The educators that supposedly wrote the CCSS had not spent much time teaching school. None were current school teachers. College experience doesn’t count. The two profs when were experts in their fields refused to sign off on the standards because they felt they needed tweaking. They forgot in mention that among the “experts” were 16 representatives of the standardized testing industry. No elementary/middle school teachers were involved in writing the standards, only approving them. No early childhood ed teachers were involved in either writing or approving them.

1) What is the Common Core? Yes the states adopted them because they were told it was the only way to get the Race to the Top Money.  They were written because the corporate education big-wigs decided they were needed. Same reason why they adopted VAM, PARCC, etc. Can’t get federal money without paying the bribe of approving the CCSS, which includes the VAM evaluation of teachers and the standardized testing.

2) OK, so what is the relationship between Common Core and my kid's math homework? New math standards have been on place for 40 years. The NCTM standards are good. The new math is not new, indeed, some methods have been around for centuries, just not here in the USA. The problem with the math standards are that many of them are totally inappropriate for the K to 3 kids. They just don’t have the brain maturity to think in the ways the CCSS wants them to think. This is why Early Childhood Ed teachers should have been on the committee that established the standards. The math questions are like those on the standardized tests associated with the CCSS. The same people who made the standards, make the tests and are in charge of the computer programs connected to the CCSS.

3) Why do we need the Common Core? In the grand scheme of things, not that many students are moving state-to-state, most move in-state. Not speaking against the military kids, just pointing out that it doesn’t justify a whole new set of standards and therefore a whole new curriculum. And the federal government is supposed to leave the standards up to the states, not make money contingent on their adoption of standards that they really had no big part of. States already had standards in place and in many cases replaced superior standards with inferior CCSS ones.

4) Where did the Common Core come from? They came from many CORPORATATIONS, the ones that are trying to close public schools and privatize education with charters and vouchers. The so-called “reformers” who have done nothing more than DEform public schools. Notice in the Family Tree, how big a part educators played. Hardly any input was from K-12 educators who know their students’ psychological, physical, and maturational abilities. And, as mentioned before, there was NO input from current teachers of grades K-3. The union heads approved the standards without seeking opinions about them from their union members. They have since changed their minds about much of the CCSS since their membership is up in arms about them.

5) What was the federal government's role in creating the Common Core? The Federal government made sure all the players understood that approving the standards would get the states’ money. That the people they appointed to the committee would rubber stamp the standards is a given.

6) What do "standards" mean? Are they the same as curricula?New standards begot new curricula written by the people who wrote the standards. New standards begot new standardized tests written by the writers of the standards. Schools’ performance depends on test results of the new standards, and so new curricula aligned with them. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? New curricula would not have been necessary if the standards and tests remained the same.

7) What are the standards replacing? The standards are replacing other standards previously written by educators in each state. Yes, some states had “inferior” standards, but others had to give up their superior ones to comply with the “incentive” for federal money. It is true that some states adjusted their standards to have some way to make the impossible No Child Left Behind goal of 100% of the kids scoring at proficient and advanced levels. The current addendum to NCLB, Race to the Top, has the same impossible goals, especially for ESL, Learning Disabled, and Pervasive Developmentally Disabled kids.

8) Are the Common Core standards harder than my state's old standards? See above.

9) Do other countries do this? Not all high performing countries do this. In fact, you really cannot compare the PISA scores of kids in other nations whose poverty level can be only 4%, while ours is 23%. When you remover the schools with more than 10% poverty levels, the USA is either first or second in all categories. In fact Singapore is talking about pulling out of the PISA tests because of the pressure associated with the tests.

10) What do the standards mean for math? For math, the CCSS mean that everyone will now be totally confused about what the kids are learning in math. Like I said above, “reform” math programs and methods have been around for at least decades, the idea being that each child should have the opportunity to take calculus in high school, and algebra by 8^th grade. A lofty goal, but it is possible for those who have been taught to think like a mathematician. You cannot implement these methods and strategies for solving in one year, or even in 5. Each year, another layer should be added, with the teachers in elementary and middle school given extensive, intensive, on-going professional development. At the same time, parents should also be given opportunities to be taught new methods and invited to attend their children’s class during math.

11) What do the standards mean for English? The writing portion of the CCSS is the most troubling to me. Elementary students are very egocentric. It is perfectly normal for them to be like this. They find it hard to be understanding of someone else’s point to view. Maturation will take them there, but certainly not at third grade age. Children should learn to write what they know first, to form coherent thoughts and expound on them through telling their own experiences. Third graders are still learning how to read, not reading to learn yet. Same with writing, learning how to form a story of several paragraphs which has a sequence, a beginning, middle and an end. To ask them to write an argumentative essay is asking too much according to ther child development milestones. The books that they list for children to read are also ridiculously hard for the younger grades. The words may not be too difficult, but the themes are meant for older, more mature kids. To require a 2^nd grader to read and understand the nuances of Charlotte’s Web is ridiculous. And although Dr. Seuss books are popular with the younger set, the vocabulary in them is not at a first grade level. Most picture books are actually written at a 4^th-5^th grade level, but meant to be read to young people. A 50-50 balance of fiction and non-fiction is probably not going to make smarter kids, but ones that are reluctant to read for pleasure.

12) What's an "informational text"? Kids have been reading informational for centuries, especially Science and Social Studies texts.

13) How are Common Core standards affecting state tests? CCSS is affecting the state tests in hat it will be replacing them, except ion those states that have backed out of it for 2014-15. The two new tests, PARCC and Smarter Balance, are meant to be taken on the computer and/or computer graded. Many problems have arisen this year with states administering the tests via computer. Some crashed, some did not perform the way they were supposed to, some of the tests required computer skills which many kids did not have. The length of the tests were not developmentally appropriate for young children – some kindergarteners spent FIVE HOURS completing their computer tests. Almost all of the grades spent more time on the tests than are asked of the bar exam, medical boards, etc.

14) What is the "assessment cliff"? The assessment cliff is a totally arbitrary line of proficiency, drawn so the results would show failure in the beginning to prove that schools were not doing their jobs. It’s very strange that they were able to predict how many would fail. How can you do that with a test no one has taken yet? Unless you have rigged it that way...

 

MORE TO COME
Still learning!

Cheating is NOT an Option

A familiar, frequently-used phrase used to describe “good” schools is “No Excuses.” It’s supposed to mean that no matter what circumstances are blocking your improvement, no excuse will be accepted for not reaching your goal. Many influential people who consider themselves “reformers” will wax poetic about the idea of no excuses.

While the thought behind the phrase may be noble, in real life there are plenty of things that can make a child’s school achievement just about impossible to happen on time. These may include physical or mental abuse, lack of sufficient health care, violence in the house and neighborhood, insufficient food, heat, water, and other factors. “No Excuses” was even a motto of the year during a recent time when our region had a horrible superintendent. It meant that only the teachers and principals were blamed for their students nor performing as well as the children in the richer suburbs performed.

“No Excuses” promoters feel that everyone can bring themselves up by their bootstraps, and often use this phrase to denounce the low scores of high poverty schools. Although it is not impossible for children to score well, it requires a certain mix of ingredients to make it happen. A supportive family, a caring community, and school personnel who can point the families towards the right services, can lay the groundwork for higher achievement of the child who is lucky enough to have all three ingredients.

No Excuses is a zero tolerance policy. I have a huge problem with zero tolerance. Everything is NOT black and white; there are more than 50 shades of grey in school and in legal situations. No excuses touts that the teacher or administrator is ALWAYS right. Not true! There are many reasons why a child acts the way they do or doesn’t act the way we want. The motivation behind a child’s disrespect almost always lies in their not feeling respected themselves. The root could have been planted at home, in the community or at school itself. Kids like this must be shown the we feel they are worthy of respect and only then will be able to teach them how to show it to others.

Teachers are on the front lines in school for these students. Teachers need to make sure they are cultivating a culture of respect in their classroom. This does not mean total acquiescence on the part of the students. If the students feel they are respected, they will be able to question the reasons behind certain rules and policies. They will be able to respectfully question and argue their point and agree to disagree, if necessary. No excuses demands total subjugation to the whims of the teacher and school. Subjugation is NOT the way to get students to work hard and contribute to society. It feeds a subculture of resistance and revolt and will come back to sting you eventually. Questioning rules is a rite of passage for teenagers coming into their own, a necessary part of growing up and finding your place in this world.

No excuses requires sick kids to come to school and have eye contact 100% of the time the lesson is being taught even though their headache is stabbing their eyes. No excuses means even though you spent 6-8 hours in the ER trying to get your asthma under control, you have your homework completely done the next day. No excuses means not being able to speak at all during the school day unless your teacher speaks to you, except for your 30 minute lunch which is often eaten in silence as a punishment for some infraction against the rules. No excuses means when you are being bullied unmercifully and you get punished for your outburst. A recent “no excuses/zero tolerance” issue came to light a few weeks ago when a bully accused a kid who was twirling his pencil of making gun shooting motions at him. The bullied kid with the pencil was suspended, questioned at the police station, given a slew of psychological tests, examined by a psychiatrist and ultimately returned to the classroom having been vindicated. No excuses put all that into motion automatically without giving the pencil-wielding kid a chance to explain. No excuses means many round kids who don’t fit in the square holes get excluded from schools unfairly.

Behavior is one no-excuses way to get rid of recalcitrant kids, academics is another. A popular law, sponsored by the American Legislative Exchange  Council (ALEC) and written into many states’ educational regulations, is the Third Grade Reading initiative. This means that if a child isn’t reading on grade level by third grade, they are retained until they can. If this includes Special Ed kids, as some school districts believe it does, then some children are going to spend a long time in grade 3. There could be many reasons why a child is not reading on grade level by third grade. I am not saying they should NOT be retained, just that you have to go on a case-by-case basis to decide. This No Excuses mantra doesn’t accept that there are exceptions and many shades of grey.

There is one area however, that I truly feel there is no excuse for, and that is cheating on standardized tests. Over the past few years, cheating scandals have occurred in many major cities such as Atlanta, Washington DC, and Philadelphia. In many cases, the teachers were either strong-armed or made to feel threatened with being fired or laid off if they didn’t help the kids or fix the wrong answers. At the same time, the principals of the schools were also being strong-armed and threatened by the superintendent in increase the scores or lose their job. I know from close association that threats and embarrassment were being foisted upon principals in Philadelphia by both the Regional and the City Superintendents. The principals would face berating remarks and have to sit there as principals whose scores had increased got special rewards and favors. They were expected to go back and do the same to their teachers. Thank God our principal would stand up for the teachers in those meetings and refuse to make our jobs any more stressful than they were already. She truly did succeed in keeping the specter of cheating at bay.

Our Test Coordinator was very thorough in her handling of the tests and in enforcing the security imposed by the state. We were trained and had to sign that we understood the procedures. She collected the tests every day before lunch and locked them in a safe place until the next morning. We had been able to make AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) every year or two. It was nice to be recognized when you did, but we didn’t let it ruin our year if we didn’t. We tried harder and changed what we thought we needed to change and tried again the next year. I never felt the need to have higher scores than anyone else, although their were some teachers on the staff who wanted to be better than their grade partner. I can honestly say that I have never allowed cheating on any standardized test in my classroom during my 37 years working in Philly schools.

Was I aware of cheating? Yes, but way back in the 60’s when we had a different principal. In fact, it was the principal who would come in the room and ask a child who had bubbled the wrong answer, “Are you sure you want that answer?” She’d ask the question as many times as it took to get the kids to mark it properly. She was obsessed with being the best school in our region, but I didn’t let that convince me to cheat, I just felt that I’d rather know honestly how the kids were doing on the test, than not be sure.

My brother-in-law is a lawyer who worked for our rival union for a while and told me stories of teachers losing their certification because of cheating. I decided that I liked teaching and didn’t want anything to happen so that I’d find myself losing my teaching certificate. I warned teachers at school about the consequences. I really don’t know if my colleagues cheated or not, but our scores didn’t go up precipitously or unexpectedly. Our test scores pretty much aligned with our report cards and reading levels, so I think that would indicate that we weren’t cheating. That coupled with the fact that we didn’t always make AYP is a fairly good indicator that our school was on the up and up.

But in these times of Value-Added metrics and 50% reliance on test scores for a teacher’s evaluation, cheating may look better and better for those principals and teachers who are trying to hang on but whose kids are not making enough progress. I retired before the 50% test score rule and I am sure I would not have received a good score on that end because of our school’s less-than-stellar performance. But the difference between me and the teachers who cheated is that I know I am a good teacher, whereas newer teachers may not feel confident in their teaching, I know that I only have so much influence on a child and the bulk of their score is molded by home, health, poverty, and community. The teacher’s roll in all that accounts for at most 15%, 85% being influenced by out-of-school factors. I know what my kids can do or not do yet. I know that each child has their own strengths and weaknesses, and those strengths may not be in an academic area. I know it’s important to develop a child’s confidence and self-esteem so they will be able to recognize when they have to persevere, and the way to do that is play on their strengths first. When I do that, I know that I am giving each child the best chance to succeed, and eventually they will.

Teachers and principals, superintendents and school board members must understand that there is no excuse for cheating in a district that supports its students well.  And that if you feel the need to cheat, maybe it’s time to leave.

http://articles.philly.com/2014-05-10/news/49745388_1_test-scores-test-answers-test-booklets

http://articles.philly.com/2014-05-10/news/49745440_1_test-scores-best-teachers-grand-jury-charges

 

Still learning!