In the article "The End of the Education Debate", Checker Finn makes the following statement:
"The education-reform debate as we have known it for a generation is creaking to a halt. No new way of thinking has emerged to displace those that have preoccupied reformers for a quarter- century — but the defining ideas of our current wave of reform ( standards, testing, and choice), and the conceptual framework built around them, are clearly outliving their usefulness.
The problem is not that these ideas are misguided. Rather, they are just not powerful enough to force the rusty infrastructure of American primary and secondary education to undergo meaningful change. They have failed at bringing about the reformers' most important goal: dramatically improved student achievement.
The next wave of education policy will therefore need to direct itself toward even more fundamental questions, challenging long-held assumptions about how education is managed, funded, designed, and overseen."
I have two questions (you could answer both in the same comment, answer one and ignore the other, or write two separate comments). The first is: Do you agree with Checker Finn's statement that the primary external reforms of the last quarter-century (standards, testing, and reform) have outlived their usefulness? Why or why not?
The second question is: What external reform do you think will have the largest impact on public education over the next quarter-century? Why?
I believe that project-based learning will have the largest impact on public education over the next quarter-century. I believe this because project-based learning helps students gain a deeper understanding of concepts and standards by building vital workplace skills and lifelong habits of learning. Projects allow students to express their own interests while working through guided parameters. Students can address community issues, explore careers, interact with adult mentors, use a wide range of technology, and present their work to authentic audiences beyond their own classrooms. This type of learning can motivate students who might otherwise find school boring or meaningless.
ReplyDeleteProject learning allows for significant differentiation. Students that struggle can be monitored closely and students that excel can be allowed to soar. Students learn to problem solve, think critically, collaborate, and how to communicate effectively. It’s much more than memorizing facts. Students ask questions, search for answers, and arrive at conclusions, leading them to construct something new: an idea, an interpretation, or a product. They develop competencies and habits of mind often referred to as “21st century skills.” By beginning with the vision of an end product or presentation in mind, project-based learning creates a context and reason to learn and understand the information and concepts.
It prepares our students to enter and compete in a global workforce.
I completely agree with Jonathan here. I too work at a PBL school, Southeast Raleigh High School and my class, Broadcasting, is COMPLETELY project based learning. In my department, we call ourselves the differentiating divas of PBL, we do it all. As Jonathan stated, there are many real world, hands on experiences for the students. The students are learning true "21st Century Learning Skills" as they are required to work effectively with a team, something that most adults have limited training in, by the way; and create and present a product that demonstrates mastery of their comprehension. While this type of learning is clearly more effective in specific classes, like arts, and literature classes. I have also seen it help students with comprehension of challenging mathematical courses as well.
DeleteSadly it seems that those on the legislative landscape might fear something like this because PBL places the control with the educator and the site. The assessments are not neatly packaged one size fits all and for those who make the decisions guiding public education seem to prefer that format and that has definitely outgrown its usefulness.
-Nicole
I do agree with Finn's statement, these reforms have outlived their usefullness. While I agree with what I believe was the intent of these reforms... a system that ensures each student receives a quality education by standardizing curriculum and assessment, providing highly qualified teachers, and holding systems that fail accountable, I don't believe the execution of these reforms produced the results that were hoped for.
ReplyDeleteHaving lived in the classroom for most of the past quarter century (18 years), I have watched as this good effort reform created stress and drama for educators. The consequences for poor testing are so harsh that many teachers have lost the joy they once found in teaching. Many teachers feel so much pressure for their students to perform on the tests that they pay more attention to the "pacing guide" and less attention to the needs of the student. In my mind, we are moving towards such severe standardization that the teacher in the classroom no longer has much room for "making great movies".
When any reform/idea/policy begins to cause more harm than good, in my mind, it has outlived its usefulness.
OMG! How about some spell check, Jodi Lay? Apologies...
DeleteWow, Jodi, 18 years in the class room? I believe I was one of the first groups of students that took end of course tests in the tenth grade - the writing test. But before EOGs and EOCs, in junior high, we took the California Achievement Test (CAT) which was used to make educational decisions such as AIG identification and course placement for the coming year.
DeleteWhat we currently know as the NCSOCS came into being in the 1980s. It has only been in the past 30 years that we have had a standardized curriculum in NC. The goal was to ensure that every student in NC received the same level of education regardless of where they lived in the state. It is ironic to me, that the new Common Core State Standards have the same goal - a rigorous education regardless of zip code.
What I question though, is why so many teachers feel so much pressure from standardizes testing to pay more attention to the pacing guide verses the needs of their students. Isnt that a folly if they truly feel the pressure from standardization - we would pay more attention to mastery instead of the rate at which they cover the content of the course?
So, who has allowed the reform/idea/policy of curriculum standardization and accountablity to cause more harm than good? Is it the policy maker or is it educators?
Why must the words EOC and EOG ever be mentioned in a course? Why must the response to why must we learn this be "because it is on the EOG"? Why can we not respond with an answer the demonstrates how the content is applicable to the real world?
The Common Core responds to so many criticism of the NCSCOS by reducing the number of standards, vertically aligning the standards, emphasizing grammar, including speaking and learning standards, and sharing the responsibility for literacy among history, science, and technology teachers. Didnt we call for these things?
Why are we not excited about the opportunity to teach something new or the challenge of implementing something new? Instead, we bemoan another change. And, arent we the same group that called for changes in our EOGs by including constructed response questions and authentic performance tasks? Arent these the things we wanted as they aligned more closely to real-world experiences, and are more rigorous assessment formats. But in a recent presentation the the teacher advisory committee, teachers complained about the amount of time required to score these formats of assessments.
Regardless of circumstances and environment, doesn't teacher involvement in the curricular and instructional decisions have the greatest impact on student achievement? All of the items cited above are curricular and instructional decisions.
Also, how are we to develop student efficacay, if we teachers are not efficacious? We can make a difference in the achievement level of our students on a daily basis. However, I have to do something...I choose to default to following the district pacing guide at the cost of meeting the needs of my students. I choose to allow the drama of accountability to diminish my level of joy in my work. I choose to be the professional that makes instructional decisions to meet the needs of my students...but then that requires me to use formative assessment regularly...ah, another reform and idea that has caused more harm.
Bud Harrelson
I agree with Jodi that a reform may have outlived its usefulness if it is being harmful. However, could a world without the standardized tests, policies, and choice be even more detrimental? Who is to say that ALL teachers will provide rigorous and valuable instruction without something motivating them (other than intrinsically) to do so? Then again, those same teachers who are not intrinsically motivated probably would not be pushed by a test hanging over their heads, either. (That kind of sounds like merit-pay.) Should cost-effectiveness (standardized tests) really drive how we 'ensure' all students receive a quality education? I can only speak for myself, but I worked just as hard when I taught a grade level that was not tested as I do now; I just feel a different type of pressure and lament having to spend so much time focused on testing and quantity of content rather than quality.
ReplyDeleteThese are not really reforms, but I do believe that factors that will have the largest impact on education over the next quarter-century will be money and politics. I believe we as educators will lose more and more of our voice (not that we have much voice anyway). It seems like those who make the biggest decisions in education know the least about what it is like to be in a real classroom with real people with very real and varying needs. Finn mentions that debates over policies do not stem so much from whether or not education will get money from the government, it is more over "what strings should be tied to those federal dollars, and toward which reforms the funding should be aimed." Since those in charge are constantly changing, who knows what reform is actually going to stick?
-Jamie
I agree with Jodi. I do not think that standardized themselves are evil. I believe that the amount of reliance that we have placed on them is absurd. I do not know what reform is needed, but I believe that it starts with classroom teachers. Somehow, we have to restore the value in education and those who are providing that education to our children everyday.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Debra, that the amount of reliance we have placed on standardized tests is absurd. We have removed the heart of teaching from the classroom and in its place have placed expectations that create almost robotic ways of delivering instruction to students who have varying levels of understanding.
DeleteI believe Finn's statement is true: "The problem is not that these ideas are misguided. Rather, they are just not powerful enough to force the rusty infrastructure of American primary and secondary education to undergo meaningful change. They have failed at bringing about the reformers' most important goal: dramatically improved student achievement." However, the first change that must be made in my opinion is the standard for achievement. How will we know when students succeed? What is the measure? Should it vary? Many times when we refer to good teachers we describe them as those who differentiate well and know the needs of all of their learners. Then, we answer that call by testing all of them on the same test, and then use that test to determine their success. While some of them may receive some accommodations and modifications none of those provisions have proven to be truly useful. Would it be better to assess success based on a year's worth of classroom performance with a portfolio exhibiting student growth? I do not know the answers, but I agree with Debra that part of it starts with classroom teachers. We have to put the humanity back into teaching. We have to teach our kids how to talk to one another and how to be contributing members of the society in which they live. However, I believe the fundamental change is in the standard of achievement itself. The research should begin there. How does one know if a child has succeeded? I would be willing to bet the research will not support a single answer for all children, but one that is more inclusive and representative of individuals.
Leigh Ann and Debra I agree with both of you. I think that teachers need to get back to teaching children and remember that standardized test should be used as a tool for to identify what needs to be reteached instead of using them to measure if a student has successfully mastered a certain competency level. If a child has successfully shown a year's growth and fails the standardized test, are we to say that this child has not successfully showed academic growth? Now, does it truly measure the student success? I don't think so because there are way too many children that are falling through the cracks....and why; because so many are putting too much emphasis on testing. I do agree with Finn because it's time for change, but there's a division between what should be transformed, and what should be put to rest.
DeleteJackie Milliken
I think that we need standardized assessments but they are not telling the full picture of student learning. Many believe that it is a recent phenomenon that schools that serve predominately low income students are failing. The schools have not changed but the accountability measures we have changed dramatically. We need a system to discuss the failures and success of schools and hold administrators and teachers accountable for the work they are or are not doing. The largest problem with our tests is that they are low level and do not assess the level of rigor that students need to perform on the job or at the university level.
ReplyDelete- Katie Hill
I agree somewhat with this notion, but not entirely. And, truth be told I don’t know if we even need standardized (testing) assessments because we have never really went without them and seen any real results. They are seemingly our failsafe measure of how a school is performing. That is the sad part, because schools do so much more than just a print out of test scores. Also, I believe you have to look at these tests that we are giving (we learned that in English’s class “cultural capital”), which are geared mainly towards your upper middle class white kid. So I don’t think its fair to blame administrators or teachers for a distorted accountability measurement. There needs to be a varying measurement for different types of students. As educators I do feel we are trying to juggle too many things at once, instead of adopting the “Hedgehog” concept and figuring out exactly what is working in education. In our last class, Education 732, one group’s topic was “How to Reduce the Dropout Rate.” This group identified what I would consider to be an example of something actually working in education, which has proven some monumental changes to reduce the dropout rate among the "predominately low income students" that you mentioned. To reduce the dropout rate tremendously, there are three specifics I recorded that actually work, which I would deem to be in line with the Hedgehog concept. In no particular order, they were as follows: Teachers being available after (school) hours everyday, lessening the amount of students in each class to 18 at the most, and having analytical writing in every class which was mainly for the predominately low income students. Obviously, there would be some to doubt that this would have an amazing effect if these things were implemented in their own school, but I believe it would definitely be worth taking a look at for not only high schools, but all schools. To answer the second question I definitely believe politics, funding, and “technology” will have the biggest impact on education over the next quarter-century.
DeleteI'm not fundamentally opposed to standardized testing - I think that well designed assessments have their place in education and some degree of standardization is needed to ensure that students across the country are being held to similar standards. One of the issues I hold with standardized test is that they are not all created equally. In reviewing released EOCs in high school social studies, the randomness of some questions is obvious. The control that the general assembly has over the curriculum teachers deliver results in random and unimportant elements being added to the curriculum that aren't relevant. In this state another problem has been the lack of released exams - we don't properly fund the creation of our exams which leads to the state guarding its tests and students and teachers being surprised by the content that is tested. These tests also do little to prepare college bound students for what is ahead, where students are required to think analytically and write rather than respond to endless multiple choice questions.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that standards, testing and choice are going anywhere anytime soon. Standards allow for governmental oversight and justify budgetary changes. Testing may change in terms of content and context (deeper/wider-Blue Ribbon-commission-speak)but this is how we measure whether the standards are met. Choice will expand if the recent action by the NC General Assembly is any indication.
ReplyDeleteAs for real reform, I believe the problem is that the government denies bad public schools the same freedom to innovate that they grant to charter schools. Instead of empowering bad public schools, they blame them and insist that competition will make them better, as if weighing that pig a few more times will make it gain weight. - Phillip Little
I will have to disagree with you to a point Phillip. Many people have this misconception that charter schools aren't held to the same standards that public schools are held to. We may have the freedom to change things up in the classroom but we are still held to the same standardized testing as every other public school. Being a charter school employee, I get to see a completely different aspect of policy and reform. Charter schools are held to higher standards than most realize. A few years ago, a new policy was passed mid-year, to which it went into affect immediately. The policy stated that if a charter school did not have an EOC pass rate of 60% or higher for two out of three years, then the school's charter would be revoked and the school would be shut down. This may not seem like a big deal to some, and while our EOC scores were higher than this, it was still something that seemed to hurt the charter school system. I have been a charter school employee for over 8 years and I have seen how a charter school can be very beneficial to those students who may otherwise fall through the cracks at a larger traditional high school. Many charter schools reach students who do struggle on standardized tests and help them with smaller learning atmospheres but if a school has to worry more about test scores and the threat of being shut down, then these students will also suffer.
DeleteIf a traditional school does poorly on test scores, then DPI sends them more funding and attention, they are treated as a "priority school" rather than a school to be shut down. I have made it a point to build close relationships with the area traditional public high schools in the hopes that we can all work together to help all students rather than make it a competition. I do believe that the education system is getting further away from helping students and more focused on testing and measuring a teacher's effectiveness on these scores. Teachers have to conform to these policies so much that they have become more like puppets rather than someone who can use their expertise and personality to make their classroom come to life. I have seen how a small learning atmosphere....15 students or less, has been a place where students can feel comfortable with themselves and the teacher can work closely with each student to make sure they are mastering the material that is being taught.
I agree with many parts of other various comments. Jonathan, I also do believe Project-Based Learning is a new initiative that could really change the way our students learn and think. Our students need those critical thinking skills and 21st century skills to meet the demands of our changing society. It allows for students to have an investment and a choice about how to approach real-world situations while learning the content. After visiting various elementary schools in WCPSS while deciding on my internship, every single one of them is phasing in PBL either this year or next school year. Nicole, I also agree with your statement about how PBL is not a neatly packaged way to deliver instruction and legislators might be fearful of that. But if the demands from the work force are to have 21st century learners, then something that is tangible for students needs to take place and I think that can be done with PBL.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Leigh Ann about how the stress of standardized testing has really taken away from the joy of teaching. It has left teachers and students both stressed out by the end of the year. But I also agree that some kind of benchmarks or standardized testing is needed to track student growth and achievement. Testing is a necessary evil but the amount focus put on it should not be stressing everyone out.
I agree with Jon, Nicole, Lauren, et al. that Project Based Learning (PBL) is a new initiative that can produce authentic learning in a real-life way. Not only is the content learned in a deep and meaningful way, but differentiation can occur naturally or with guidance from the instructor. I believe that the most critical skills that students learn in PBL experiences are critical thinking skills. Learning to collaborate, creatively think, think critically and communicate are skills that the work force of today and tomorrow are looking for. As a physical education teacher, there is a saying that "practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect." I believe that in order to teach 21st century thinking skills, students need to "perfectly practice" them. This means that they need to be placed into real-life, authentic learning situations and PBL can provide this for them.
ReplyDeleteThe federal government wants to turn educating our nation's children into a business. Race to the Top, the Common Core Curriculum, and national standardized tests are supposed to "reform" our "failing" public education system,but ultimately they may do more harm than good. The problem with this way of thinking is that educating children is far more complex than turning out a "good product" in a business model.
ReplyDeleteWhen I became a teacher 7 years ago, I wanted to make a difference in the lives of kids. I still hold fast to this creed today... but to be quite honest, I think that high-stakes testing has negatively impacted the altruistic intentions of becoming an educator to a lot of people. (I know that no one got into it for the $!) In the eyes of a lot of good teachers/administrators, the demands of student achievement on high-stakes tests and making AYP within a school has diminished the "calling" of educating children to the best of our abilities to doing our part to ensure that we have good EOG scores and keeping our jobs.
Is this the reform that educational "experts" had in mind when developing the national standards and high-stakes testing model? I'm 100% in favor of accountability and ensuring that all students are learning somehow, but the standardized approach is not working. As Dr. Schianker likes to say, "We are in the Box." I'm not quite sure if the 5-3-3 technique will get us out of this one, but if anyone wants to try it with me, just let me know.
I agree with a lot of what has been said previously. I do think standardized testing has a place in the our educational system. However, I do feel that too much emphasis has been placed on the test. It seems like we have gone away from teaching our students for content and teach them how to take and pass the test. I teach 3rd grade and this is exactly what happens. Now granted this is the first time that they have taken the test so we do have to spend some time talking about the set up of the test and what to expect. But my experience over the past few years is that a substantial amount of time has been spent working on "stuff" in preparation for the test and not enough time on teaching for knowledge.
ReplyDeleteJanika Davis
I agree that the school reform/s that have been taking place over the last decade are not meaningless, but that they should mean less than they actually do. Testing does provide feedback as to how the students are doing in certain areas and can give comparisons for other schools to have a perspective as to how they rate based on other schools. However, deciding if a school or teacher is "good" simply based on test scores undermines the concept of education and the educational system. It also works to disenfranchise many students from the education that the reforms seek to provide for, by having teachers spend enormous amounts of time on test preparation, instead of teaching what will actually help that child become a productive citizen and member of our society. As I teach my students, tests should be used as a tool to help recognize strengths and areas of growth. They should not be punitive devices that often demean schools, belittle educators, and re-stroke the fires of incompetency.
ReplyDeleteEllen Hadley
It seems to me that public education is too big a system to boil down to the issues that have gained traction in the public discourse about it. Standards, testing, and choice are all issues that are part of the puzzle for ensuring high quality education. However, I agree with Finn's assessment that they are too small to move our system in a fundamental way. Instead of embracing the potential our new standards and assessments might represent, our culture uses them to ratchet up pressure on public school teachers. The negativity associated with some of these issues was not created by school teachers, either. I agree, Bud, that we could embrace instead of bemoan things like Common Core Standards, but I am not convinced that the implementation, at least in our state, has given teachers a serious opportunity to do so. I have heard more than one district-level official say "The Common Core is coming" in a voice that made it sound less like a new paradigm in curriculum delivery and more like a tornado! Public pressure may very well be strong enough to bully schools into caring only about standards and testing so they can avoid being subject to the choice movement, but fear, while it inspires compliance, does not generate innovation. As I read my classmates' responses, for instance, the places where the passion for the profession emerged came when people got to discuss the ways in which their schools were unique. Jonathan's argument for Project Based Learning isn't a response to a state curriculum standards but a passionate belief about learning that comes out of his school's ethos. Dave's defense of charter schools comes from his years of experience seeing his school and its flexibility help kids, not from the threat of reduced public funding and public lotteries that charter schools have, for many, come to represent. Teachers, administrators, and the public champion reform initiatives that represent hope. While they don't have to, too often, standards, assessment, and choice only appear to inspire meek acceptance. These things may keep a system churning along, but they do not create change.
ReplyDelete-Al Donaldson