Poverty is no excuse?

One of the current mantras used by reformistas is "poverty is no excuse for poor performance at school", I heard our Education Secretary make a similar statement while explaining  poor test scores and the recent study that indicates that poverty is linked to poor reading scores in the 4th grade 


We can ignore the problem of poverty all we want, but it will not go away.  Poverty is the core of the education problem in the United States.  These children miss more school, come to school needing better nutrition and are frequently stressed from problems at home.  They have cortisone coursing through their systems impairing their ability to learn.  We can probably get them to sit still and appear to pay attention, but learning requires much more than these kids can give.


Instead of indicting the entire education system, going on witch hunts for bad teachers and closing schools that don't measure up why don't we use all of data gathering to find out who needs help and then truly look at the research and use it to help those in need of help. 


No matter what your political beliefs, the young children who go to school do not know what you mean when you tell them they are failing.  They did not cause this problem and unless someone helps them create quality environments for learning they will have a hard time helping themselves.


I would like to share an article by Daniel T. Willingham from the spring 2012 edition of the American Educator online.  Click here to read "Why Does Family Wealth Affect Learning?"  Dr. Willingham, a cognitive scientist, explains that in addition to having fewer material and social supports, children from low-income families also tend to have chronic stress that can significantly impede their learning.  Research shows that besides social service supports, a teacher' warmth toward and high expectations for disadvantaged children can help them reach their potential.

Finland's Success

These thoughts have been provoked by the article, "A Model Lesson, Finland Shows Us What Equal Opportunity Looks Like" by Pasi Sahlberg.  Click here to read this article in American Educator Online.

I have been following the story of Finland's education success with interest.  I watched a program with one of Finland's education ministers and he said something that resonates with me because it seems to be such a common sense approach to education for a country like the United States of America.  It cuts to the core of what I believe this country represents.  Opportunity for all.  The minister said that while they were reforming Finland's education their goal was to create equity for all citizens.

In other words they were creating an education system to provide a level playing field for everyone.  Out of this system of equity developed a system of excellence.  It is hard for me to understand why the U.S.A. can not put the idea of equity at the core of our education system.  Why is it not possible to go to the failing schools and provide them with the resources and human capital they need to provide an education equal to that a student from a rich suburb has the opportunity to obtain.

The problem from my point of view is this,

In the United States we place our emphasis in education upon choice and competition, in Finland their driving philosophy is equity and shared responsibility.  

In the U.S. A. we think as individuals because we have been trained by an education system that places us in an age group cadre that rewards only those who can best follow directions for 12 years in a row.  This training skews our thinking toward competition and the idea that those who don't think like us don't think correctly.

We are now living in a world where all people are clamoring for access to the resources America has monopolized to become the powerhouse it is.  If we do not learn to cooperate with one another we may eventually be denied resources from outside our national borders.

 Remember what John Donne wrote, "No man is an island, entire of itself" this is true for nations as well, even those as rich and powerful as the U.S.A.  We must learn the skill of cooperation so that we might draw upon all members of society to build our future.

Beyond the Hard Truths of Teaching

I have been trying to get myself motivated to start blogging about education on a regular basis once again.  I am going through my education files and while doing so found this article by Marvin Chachere that closely mirrors my feeling about teaching.  


Click here to learn more about Mr. Chachere  a retired teacher and University of California administrator who played saxophone in his youth with a New Orleans jazz band and died June 17, 2010 after 82 years of life.

BEYOND THE HARD TRUTHS OF TEACHING 

Marvin Chachere

EARLY ON in my teaching career I learned that most principals, superintendents, and deans don't worry much about fostering student learning. 

I'm not sure precisely what they do worry about or even what interests them. Perhaps it's management itself. matching means to ends. Or maybe it's simply tranquillity, • school that's run smoothly. At any rate, teachers and managers have little in common. 

When I taught college. I told my students each semester, quite bluntly. that their institution wasn't organized and run primarily for their learning. I reminded them that they'd worked hard to gain admission. only to be hassled in registration lines. circumscribed by course requirements, intimidated by term papers and exams. categorized by grade points. 

My message, of course. was a truism: Wanting to know something is a necessary precondition for leaming it. "How many of you are here to learn philosophy?" I'd ask. Everyone. (It was an elective course.) "How many of you would be here if this course offered no credit?" No one. 

Students know the difference between learning a subject and going through the motions because they need the credits. Indeed, if a student really wants to learn, he doesn't need good teaching, and if he doesn't want to learn, the best teaching is useless. You can't force anyone to learn anything, unless you're an army sergeant teaching a recruit to fire a rifle. You may tell others what to learn, but this carries no force. Students recognize their rights in this very clearly, and they can easily reject your teaching. 

By now you may be thinking that if I had any self-respect [ should have long ago sought other work.  But for me it was precisely by recognizing these realities and struggling. with them in my own mind (if not in faculty committees, board meetings. and teachers' unions) that I found nourishment as a teacher. I enjoyed teaching and I stayed with it, but not to invent methods for jamming Iearning into the minds of unwilling students. If I wanted reform at all. it was in how I saw my job. Gripped by cynicism regarding my superiors and futility regarding my charges. I still struggled to see teaching as noble work. 

My efforts weren't completely successful, but they brought satisfaction. Once I decided to Iet the managers and policymakers get on with their work, whatever it may be. I was free to get on with mine. By concentrating on the conditions of my students their real and supposed reasons for being in my class, their interests and abilities, even their joys and sorrows. I sought to reform my thinking, to neutralize the negative forces. In other words. I sought the essence of teaching: to stimulate, inspire, animate and arouse another.

" The main job of the teacher is to convey enthusiasm. A teacher isn’t a purveyor of intormation, a guide to the realm of ideas, ambassador of culture, a certifier of students' achievements, or a  guarantor of good. paying jobs. Even less is a teacher concerned with development of a students' character and good citizenship. The only goal that's worth pursuing is to inspire your students with a love of your subject. Any other outcome, however honorable, is incidental. 

This is simplistic, you say. All teachers try to get students interested in their subjects-and good teachers succeed. My point may be simple, but it's not simplistic. It carries three practical consequences, each affecting the improvement of teaching. 

The first consequence is that you acknowledge your students' individual likes and dislikes even as you continue to show them how they can become enthused about what you're teaching. Realize that some students just don't like math, history, literature, science, or whatever. In recognizing individuality, you recognize reality. 

The second consequence is that there's no subject for which studentls' enthusiasm is unworthy or unwarranted, not even basket-weaving. Let me quickly add that I don't propose teaching something just because students will sign up for it-a Bruce Springsteen seminar? But interest in one thing may lead to interest in other things; basket-weaving isn't unrelated to geometry, to physics, to history. Any student who shows you enthusiasm about anything at all has displayed a certain capacity. Good teaching implies the ability to exploit that capacity. find ways to put it to use, and transfer it, if possible to your subject. 

The third consequence follows from the simple essence of teaching. You can’t arouse enthusiasm for a subject unless you've mastered it. The more you learn the more ways you have for arousing students' interests, and the better your teaching will be. Mastery is far more important than methods. Methods follow mastery, not the other way around. Students will be quick to see your enthusium. and if it sterms from mastery they may catch it. 

That's all you can hope and work for. And it's enough. ~ 

Thoughts on Home Schooling

I have been thinking about home schooling for awhile.  I have mixed feelings about the movement because I have met a number of home schooled people with a healthy outlook on life who know how to learn.  As a former teacher, and as a Dad, I do have doubts about the ability many parents to create a full picture of the world and an appreciation for the depth of the knowledge humans have accumulated.  I also know that the basic skills of schooling are not very difficult to master, a teacher's art is partially imparting those skills to a diverse group of kids in a classroom.

Probably the most compelling reason not to homeschool is contained in this quote from Dick Cavett in his blog at the New York Times, Opinonator.

To deny kids the adventure and socialization of going to school, thereby missing out on the activities, gossip, projects, dances, teams, friendships and social skills developed — to deny kids this is shortsighted and cruel. I think of the mournful home-school kid watching his friends board the school bus, laughing, gossiping and enjoying all that vital socialization we call schooldays.

Then again, that is why many children are home schooled is to keep them apart from their peers.

     I may be out of step, but I do not believe there is a crisis in education.  There is a crisis of remembering what it was like when one was young.  I have returned to college after six years of retirement.  I am working on a BA in Creative Writing and I have had to take some two hundred level courses.  That has put me into class with students who have generally been out of high school for one to three years.  After 32 years working in public and private schools I am facing the products of the failing American school system.
     It has been an interesting year and I have learned many things I should have learned earlier in my life.  I am finding the university classes challenging and full of new information filling gaps in my understandings and knowledge base.  While I am more focused than I was when I began work toward my initial degree, I am finding many of my classmates to be just as focused and willing to work hard for a good grade.  There are also students in my classes who were just like I was when I began, confused, unfocused and working to complete their program and get out into the real world.  The point I am making is I do not see students who are less prepared than I or any different from the students I encountered in my first go round in college over  forty five years ago.
     Sometimes, when speaking with my peers I wonder why they were so different than I when we were young.  I realize now that it a memory gap.  The 'good old days' were superior to these days.  The funny thing is I get the feeling that the 20 year old students in class with me today will feel the same way when they are older.  I bet there are many different ways of looking at this situation.

Right Words

        Teaching is a skill that requires more than exposition of information.  Teachers work with young, impressionable people who are vulnerable to the words they hear.  Children are still learning about sarcasm, irony and hyperbole.  Those who work with them must always be careful of the way they use words with their students.  The following story illustrates an unintended positive result from a teacher's words.

        Jolie was a pretty typical teenager from my point of view, even though I really don’t remember her well.  She was undergoing a cognitive and physical transformation like most of the sixteen year old studnets in my U.S. History class.   She didn’t particularly like school, like most of my students, but she wasn’t oppositional.  She dressed appropriately, from a teacher’s point of view.  She didn’t have any of the outward characteristics that marked her as a risk taking narcissistic adolescent. No spiked hair, sexuality or crazy colors.   She was chatty and polite.  I remember she sat at the front and to the right of the podium in the large classroom I had been assigned.  She did her work, but missed more school than a learner can afford and still succeed.  I don’t remember what grade she got or even if she finished the school year.  I do know she transformed me as a teacher.  

Now my brain gets fuzzy and I can not tell you much more about her.  I spent my time practicing effective teaching and although I truly enjoyed my students, I didn’t really involve myself in their lives.  I had three kids of my own, 130 other students, two dogs, one wife and a soccer team I coached.  I was a pretty typical high school teacher, who after 15 years of teaching had found a rhythm that satisfied my life.  I had discussions with my students about life, behavior, schooling and other topics that many teenagers find more interesting than U.S. History.  I considered myself student centered, but in retrospect I was curriculum oriented and under pressure to present a certain amount of information on a schedule determined by our department chairman.

I began my teaching career in the Marine Corps teaching electronics.  I learned how to pour information into a brain and use discipline to make my students listen to me.  When I began teaching I was a follower of B.F. Skinner, the behaviorist.  Data in according to rules, apply certain formulas for information retention, and mix in the proper balance of discipline and reward.  That was my philosophy and it applied to all students,.  

After I was discharged I followed my wife’s suggestion and became a school teacher, like her.  I went to the university and encountered other ways of thinking about teaching; I was introduced to other philosophies, open schools, and alternative methods of discipline.  When I went into the classroom I continued to teach the way the Marine Corps had trained me to teach.    

I did not truly understand the power of words.  I thought if I loudly and firmly that was enough.  But, what we say to children and how we say it can have powerful effects over their thinking for many years.  It is sort of like one day finding a plant growing in your garden that you don’t remember planting.  One of the clearest examples of this was shown to me by the eight year old son of a friend.  We were playing a game of Boce, before we began he and I had a discussion about cheating.  My parting words were, “Cheaters are losers!”  After my side lost the game Dylan announced that I was a cheater.  That wasn’t what I meant for him to learn.  See what I mean, words are powerful and teachers have innumerable opportunities to grow unintended plants.

By the time Jolie had become a student in my class I had learned many ways of teaching my subject and managing my class, but I still did not understand the unintended consequences of words.  I did chat with my students from time to time.  I was not such an effective teacher that every moment was spent on content.  I tried to give my students time to make their own meaning of the information, and we often had conversations about things that were troubling them.  They were always interested in news about views of society about teens, romance, risk-taking, and other tidbits I tried to incorporate into my classes.  By now I knew that ordering adolescents around is like stacking ping pong balls and didn’t use the same type of bombastic language I used just after my discharge.  I realize now I was on a journey of discovery about education that was part of my maturation process.  Jolie helped me to complete that process.

The year after Jolie was in my class I could not recall her features and barely remembered her name.  She however remembered me.  One day  before Christmas break I entered my office and there on my desk was a letter from Jolie.  I must confess that what she said was the result of unintentional gardening, but what blossomed was truly wonderful.  She explained that she had been depressed, dropped out of school, and continued a downward spiral that eventually caused her to attempt suicide.  I say attempt with relief and joy, for what a loss each young life is.  What was truly wonderful was her explanation for her recovery and decision to live.  She explained that I told her things in class that upon reflection gave her hope and confidence about herself and her future.  

Jolie’s note gave me hope that I was accomplishing something worthwhile.  It is true if you can save one child it is worth any effort you have put into others.    She caused me to understand that kindness is the most important thing we can teach.   It is not the curriculum that matters, it is how we treat our children that is important.  With the right words we can create a garden of beauty.

Debunking PISA

I have been disappointed with America's response to reforming our education system. The things we need to do have been lost in irrelevant arguments about the problems. It seems as if the talking points for reform are the same as those of people who wish to destroy our public education system and replace it with a system of private schools fueled by vouchers.  Now, I am not opposed to vouchers.  I think it could be a better system of financing our schools than our current system.  I believe that vouchers could unleash educational entrepreneurs and give parents more control over their children's education.  Vouchers will only work after we have leveled the playing field for all American children.

The problem with vouchers and current reform is that corporate greed is at the heart of the movement.  I believe that vouchers are the dream of corporations getting their hands on all the federal and state money expended on education.  Anytime the feds spend money, corporations line up with their hands out like beggars because they know the federal government is easy to fool and they want that money.

We are all being fooled into believing that America's education system is failing everyone by the movement that wants to take over public education in order to enrich their shareholders and CEOs.  Unfortunately, much of the charter movement has been co-opted by this movement already.  Who benefits by nationwide standardized testing?  Who benefits by controlled standardized curriculums?  Not the small school district in the middle of Kansas who have particular needs and the know how to solve their problems!

Why do we believe that all of our schools are failing?  After years of research and anti poverty advocates like Ruby Payne and Jonathon Kozol, we still miss the point that what is failing are schools that serve a high percentage of children living in poverty, not all schools.  Vouchers, charters and high expectations will not solve this problem.

Stephen Krashen's article The Tiger Mom, and Inaccurate Reporting in the blog Schools Matter addresses this problem by pointing out the inaccurate reporting about education in Time Magazine's article Tiger Mom: Is Tougher Parenting Really the Answer written by Amy Chua .  Time Magazine reports that the indication our schools are failing can be found in America's scores on the PISA, an international test that places American children in the middle of other countries' overall scores on this standardized test.  He points out that when adjusted for poverty levels, our children from middle class homes score at the top and those children who live in poverty are at the bottom of the test results.

The article It's The Poverty Stupid! published by the National Association of Secondary School Prinicpals points out the following statistics about the PISA and  poverty.

 Of all the nations participating in the PISA assessment, the U.S. has, by far, the largest number of students living in poverty--21.7%. The next closest nations in terms of poverty levels are the United Kingdom and New Zealand have poverty rates that are 75% of ours.

·      U.S. students in schools with 10% or less poverty are number one country in the world.

·      U.S. students in schools with 10-24.9% poverty are third behind Korea, and Finland.

·      U.S. students in schools with 25-50% poverty are tenth in the world.

·      U.S. students in schools with greater than 50% poverty are near the bottom.

·      There were other surprises. Germany with less than half our poverty, scored below the U.S. as did France with less than a third our poverty and Sweden with a low 3.6% poverty rate.

America is number one at raising children who live in poverty!  Our response after years of failed programs to eradicate poverty is to simply say that poverty is not an excuse for poor academic perfomance.  That may be true, but the effects of poverty upon our children is signigicant.  All of the indicators of poor brain development are enhanced by living in poverty.  As Stephen Krashen so aptly writes:

Poverty means poor nutrition, substandard health care, environmental toxins, and little access to books; all of these factors have a strong negative impact on school success. The problem is poverty, not the quality of our schools.

Eric Medina in his work as a molecular biologist reports that Healthy brains require good nutrition, sleep, and little stress.   Many children from impoverished neighborhoods and homes do not come to school ready to learn because of their environment.  I find it difficult to understand why American's are so reluctant to attack the underlying cause of our problems and search for new solutions yet so willing  to embrace repackaged 19th century methods of education.  It is probably because that 19th century method of education has caused our thinking to remain static while technology and innovation march into the future.  That is what those who propose to destroy America's public education system want, a simple answer to a complex problem.  As long as poverty is not even on the table as a point of discussion in educational reform, we will continue to have many children who can not succeed in our schools.