Archives for September 2011

Teaching About Sex In Schools

For the first time in nearly two decades, students in New York City’s public middle and high schools will be required to take sex-education classes beginning this school year, using a curriculum that includes lessons on how to use a condom and the appropriate age for sexual activity. According to city statistics, African-American and Latino teenagers teenagers are far more likely than their white counterparts to have unplanned pregnancies and contract sexually-transmitted diseases.

Nationwide, one in four teenagers between 2006 and 2008 learned about abstinence without receiving any instruction in schools about contraceptive methods, according to an analysis by the Guttmacher Institute, which studies reproductive health. As of January, 20 states and the District of Columbia mandated sex and H.I.V. education in schools.

New York City’s new mandate goes beyond the state’s requirement that middle and high school students take one semester of health education classes. The city’s mandate calls for schools to teach a semester of sex education in 6th or 7th grade, and again in 9th or 10th grade. At the same time, knowing that many teenagers are sexually active, the city administration wants to teach them about safe sex in the hopes of reducing pregnancy, disease and dropouts.

The new classes, which will be coeducational, could be incorporated into existing health education classes, so principals will not have to scramble to find additional instructional time. The classes would include a mix of lectures, perhaps using statistics to show that while middle school students might brag about having sex, not many of them actually do; group discussions about, for example, why teenagers are often resistant to condoms; and role-playing exercises that might include techniques to fend off unwanted advances.

High schools in New York have been distributing condoms for more than 20 years. In the new sex-education classes, teachers will describe how to use them, and why.

The statistics about increased sexual activity and unwanted pregnancies cannot be disputed. However, isn’t this the realm of parents? And if parents do not want to teach it, is this the responsibility of schools? It seems that every time parents take a step back, schools are expected to take a step forward. Parents used to be responsible for teaching their children about driving instruction, swimming, stopping drug and alcohol abuse, not smoking, etc. It is now the school’s responsibility. We do not have the training, or the time to take on additional responsibilities. Nor with the added burden of additional budget cuts, do schools have the funding to pay for additional positions.

My Latest Huffington Post Blog

I am proud to announce that the Huffington Post has posted my latest blog entitled “Who is driving educational reform:

You can access it through: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/franklin-schargel/educational-reform_b_976710.html

It’s also permanently listed in your author archive:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/franklin-schargel/

Students Do Not Know American History

American students are less proficient in their nation’s history than in any other subject, according to results of a nationwide test released on Tuesday, with most fourth graders unable to say why Abraham Lincoln was an important figure and few high school seniors able to identify China as the North Korean ally that fought American troops during the Korean War.

Over all, 20 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders and 12 percent of high school seniors demonstrated proficiency on the exam, the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Federal officials said they were encouraged by a slight increase in eighth-grade scores since the last history test, in 2006. But even those gains offered little to celebrate, because, for example, fewer than a third of eighth graders could answer even a “seemingly easy question” asking them to identify an important advantage American forces had over the British during the Revolution, the government’s statement on the results said.

Diane Ravitch, an education historian who was invited by the national assessment’s governing board to review the results, said she was particularly disturbed by the fact that only 2 percent of 12th graders correctly answered a question concerning Brown v. Board of Education, which she called “very likely the most important decision” of the United States Supreme Court in the past seven decades.

Students were given an excerpt including the passage “We conclude that in the field of public education, separate but equal has no place, separate educational facilities are inherently unequal,” and were asked what social problem the 1954 ruling was supposed to correct.

“The answer was right in front of them,” Ms. Ravitch said. “This is alarming.”

The tests were given last spring to a representative sample of 7,000 fourth graders, 11,800 eighth graders and 12,400 12th graders nationwide. History is one of eight subjects “” the others are math, reading, science, writing, civics, geography and economics “” covered by the assessment program, which is also known as the Nation’s Report Card. The board that oversees the program defines three achievement levels for each test: “basic” denotes partial mastery of a subject; “proficient” represents solid academic performance and a demonstration of competency over challenging subject matter; and “advanced” means superior performance.

If history is American students’ worst subject, economics is their best: 42 percent of high school seniors were deemed proficient in the 2006 economics test, a larger proportion than in any other subject over the last decade. But Jack Buckley, commissioner of the statistical center at the Department of Education that carries out the tests, said on Monday that because the assessments in each subject were prepared and administered independently, it was not really fair to compare results across subjects.

On the 2010 history test, the proportion of students scoring at or above proficiency rose among fourth graders to 20 percent from 18 percent in 2006, held at 17 percent among eighth graders, and fell to 12 percent from 13 percent among high school seniors.

On the test’s 500-point scale, average fourth- and eighth-grade scores each increased three points since 2006. But officials said only the eighth-grade increase, to 266 in 2010 from 263 in 2006, was statistically significant. Average 12th-grade scores dropped, to 288 in 2010 from 290 in 2006.

While changes in the overall averages were microscopic, there was significant upward movement among the lowest-performing students “” those in the 10th percentile “” in fourth and eighth grades and a narrowing of the racial achievement gap at all levels. On average, for instance, white eighth-grade students scored 274 on the latest test, 21 points higher than Hispanic students and 23 points above black students; in 2006, white students outperformed Hispanic students by 23 points and black students by 29 points.

History advocates contend that students’ poor showing on the tests underlines neglect shown to the subject by federal and state policy makers, especially since the 2002 No Child Left Behind act began requiring schools to raise scores in math and reading but in no other subject. The federal accountability law, the advocates say, has given schools and teachers an incentive to spend less time on history and other subjects.

“History is very much being shortchanged,” said Linda K. Salvucci, a history professor in San Antonio who is chairwoman-elect of the National Council for History Education.

Many teacher-education programs, Ms. Salvucci said, also contribute to the problem by encouraging aspiring teachers to seek certification in social studies, rather than in history. “They think they’ll be more versatile, that they can teach civics, government, whatever,” she said. “But they’re not prepared to teach history.”

Things Babies Born In 2011 Will Never Know.

The most popular thing I have ever posted on this website is “25 Things Which Will be Extinct in 25 years.” I do not know who sent it to me. If I did I would give them credit. This was posted by xenohistorian

Things are changing very rapidly. Educators will have difficulty explaining the following to their students.

1. VCRs & VHS tapes
2. Travel agents
3. Separation between work life and personal life
4. Forgetting
5. Bookstores
6. Watches
7. Phone sex via 1-900 numbers
8. Maps
9. Calling people on the phone (as opposed to texting)
10. Classified ads in newspapers
11. Dial-up Internet
12. Encyclopedias on the shelf
13. CDs
14. Landline Phones
15. Film and film cameras
16. Yellow pages and address books
17. Catalogs
18. Fax machines
19. Wires
20. Hand-written letters

Suspending Students

Nearly 60 percent of public junior high school and high school students get suspended or expelled, according to a report that tracked about 1 million Texas children over six years.

More than 30 percent of the Texas seventh- through 12th-grade students received out-of-school suspension, which averaged two days.

About 15 percent were suspended or expelled at least 11 times, and nearly half of those ended up in the juvenile justice system. Most students who experienced multiple suspensions or expulsions do not graduate, according to the study by the Council of State Governments Justice Center and the Public Policy Research Institute of Texas A&M University.

The study is considered groundbreaking because it relies on the actual tracking of students instead of a sample.The study found:

For the nearly 60 percent formally disciplined, the actions ranged from in-school suspension for as little as one class period to being expelled.

Three percent of the disciplinary actions resulted from conduct for which the state requires removal from class “” such as aggravated assault or using a firearm on school property “” while 97 percent were at the discretion of the school district for school conduct code violations.

Special-education students, particularly those categorized as emotionally disturbed, were more likely to be disciplined.

83 percent of African American male students had at least one discretionary violation, compared with 74 percent of Hispanic male students and 59 percent of Anglo male students.

The same pattern applies for female students “” 70 percent for African Americans, compared with 58 percent for Hispanics and 37 percent for Anglos.

“We see so many kids being removed from the classrooms for disciplinary reasons, often repeatedly, demonstrating that we’re not getting the desired changes in behavior,” Thompson said. “When we remove kids from the classroom, we see an increased likelihood in that student repeating a grade, dropping out or not graduating. We also see an increased likelihood of juvenile justice involvement.”

The report confirms his concern about criminalizing classroom behavior.

Suzanne Marchman, spokeswoman for the Texas Education Agency, added that the agency is concerned that the study creates an impression that students might be committing serious crimes, while most are disciplined for discretionary infractions as minor as a wild hairdo.

Woods said the district monitors discipline rates at campuses each semester and addresses trends with those administrators.

In the San Antonio Independent School District, special-education students were most disproportionately disciplined “” 16 percent received in-school suspension versus about 10 percent for the total student body. 2009-2010 disciplinary data collected by the TEA show that African American students, special-education students and at-risk students are disciplined at higher rates.

Disruptive students need to be dealt with. But referring them to the criminal justice system should be the exception rather than the rule. Dumping them on the streets doesn’t address the root cause of the problem and makes a school problem, a societial problem. At the same time, alternative schools should not be used as a “dumping ground for disruptive students until schools discover why they were disruptive.

Uplifting School Film

Tony Thacker, my co-author Schools Where Teachers Lead, Creating School Cultures That Embrace Learning, and From At-Risk to Academic Excellence will be featured in the new documentary “American Teacher” directed by Vanessa Roth and Brian McGinn and narrated by Matt Damon. The documentary follows teachers as they face day to day struggles and is interspersed with interviews conducted with experts. Tony Thacker was chosen to be interviewed following a presentation he gave at a NCTAF Conference in Washington D.C ““ a sizeable portion of his interview was used in the documentary.

At the 34th Annual Philadelphia International Film Festival, “American Teacher” received the silver award in the documentary category. The documentary will officially debut on September 23rd, 2011, in New York and Los Angeles. The documentary will also screen on September 29th,2011 in San Francisco and October 3rd, 2011 in Boston.

After being beaten down by governors, the media and the film, “Bad Teacher” this film should uplift your spirits.

American Schools ARE Globally Competitive

According to Diann Woodard, President of the American Federation of School Administrators, in the Summer Issue of The Leader, some American schools are globally competitive. “The most recent results from the International Reading Literacy Study and the Trends in International Math and Science (TIMSS) conducted in 2006 revealed that a major group of American Students ranked first in reading, first in science, and third in math. Who were these students? They were kids in US schools that enjoyed a poverty rate of less than 10 percent. Even students in U.S. schools where the poverty rate rose to as high as 25 percent still ranked first in reading and science. As the percent of student in poverty rises, the test scores decline.”

As Ms.. Woodard points out 20 percent of all U.S. schools have poverty rates greater than 75 percent. With the growing American economic crisis, we are creating an increasing permanent underclass. With governors across the country making deep cuts in education, they are assigning a growing number of children to poverty which they will never get out of because they will lack the education and skills necessary.

Teacher Accountability and Evaluation

The National Education Association (NEA) has at their annual conference in Chicago accepted a change to their constitution accepted a practice of evaluating teachers. I believe that the change is so important that I included the entire message.

Consistent with NEA’s belief that the “teaching profession is a cornerstone of society,” “composed of individuals who meet the highest standards” of “evaluation” and “accountability,” (NEA Resolution D-1), and recognizing that evaluation and accountability systems too often leave teachers without the feedback or support needed to enhance practice and advance student learning, NEA sets forth below the criteria for the types of teacher evaluation and accountability systems necessary to ensure a high quality public education for every student.

I. High Quality Teacher Evaluation Systems

NEA believes that our students and teachers deserve high quality evaluation systems that provide the tools teachers need to continuously tailor instruction, enhance practice and advance student learning. Such systems must provide both ongoing non-evaluative, formative feedback and regular, comprehensive, meaningful and fair evaluations. Such systems must be developed and implemented with teachers and their representatives, either through collective bargaining where available, or in partnership with the affiliate representing teachers at the state and local level.

a. All teachers should be regularly evaluated by highly trained evaluators on the basis of clear standards as to what teachers should know and be able to do. Such standards should be high and rigorous and define the rich knowledge, skills, dispositions and responsibilities of teachers. Such standards may be based on national models such as the NEA Principles of Professional Practice, the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium Model Core Teaching Standards, the Standards developed by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, or statewide standards for the teaching profession.

b. Evaluations must be comprehensive ““ based on multiple indicators to provide teachers with clear and actionable feedback to enhance their practice ““ and must include all three of the following components:

i. Indicators of Teacher Practice demonstrating a teacher’s subject matter knowledge, skill in planning and delivering instruction that engages students, ability to address issues of equity and diversity, and ability to monitor and assess student learning and adjust instruction accordingly. Such indicators may include the following indicators or others chosen by a local or state affiliate: classroom observations, proof of practice (e.g., lesson plans, curriculum plans, student assessments, minutes from team planning meetings, curriculum maps, and teacher instructional notes), teacher interviews and self-assessments.

ii. Indicators of Teacher Contribution and Growth demonstrating a teacher’s professional growth and contribution to a school’s and/or district’s success. Such indicators may include the following indicators or others chosen by a local or state affiliate: completion of meaningful professional development that is applied to practice; structured collaboration with colleagues focused on improving practice and student outcomes (e.g., by way of professional learning communities and grade or subject teams); evidence of reflective practice; teacher leadership in the school, district or educational community; collaborative projects with institutions of higher education; and positive engagement with students, parents and colleagues.

iii. Indicators of Contribution to Student Learning and Growth demonstrating a teacher’s impact on student learning and growth. Such indicators must be authentic, reflect that there are multiple factors that impact a student’s learning beyond a teacher’s control, and may include the following indicators or others chosen by a local or state affiliate: student learning objectives developed jointly by the teacher and principal/evaluator; teacher-created assessments; district or school assessments; student work (papers, portfolios, projects, presentations); teacher defined objectives for individual student growth; and high quality developmentally appropriate standardized tests that provide valid, reliable, timely and meaningful information regarding student learning and growth. Unless such tests are shown to be developmentally appropriate, scientifically valid and reliable for the purpose of measuring both student learning and a teacher’s performance, such tests may not be used to support any employment action against a teacher and may be used only to provide non-evaluative formative feedback.

c. Evaluations must be meaningful, providing all teachers with clear and actionable feedback linked to tailored professional development. Such feedback should include regular non-evaluative formative feedback ““ meaning feedback that serves only to inform practice and that does not contribute to formal evaluation results ““ as such feedback is often the most effective way to improve teacher practice. Such non-evaluative feedback may include self-reflection, peer observation and/or teacher approved surveys of students to assess engagement and learning behaviors.

d. Evaluations must be fair, conducted by highly trained and objective supervisors or other evaluators as agreed to by the local affiliate, whose work is regularly reviewed to ensure the validity and reliability of evaluation results. If an evaluation will be the basis for any action relating to a teacher’s employment, ratings by more than one evaluator must be provided in support of the action. Where a teacher believes an evaluation does not accurately reflect his or her level of practice, the teacher must have the right to contest the evaluation, and have access to the information necessary to do so.

e. To satisfy these requirements, evaluation systems must be adequately funded and staffed, and fully developed and validated, including by training all teachers on the new systems, before they are used to make any high stakes employment decisions. NEA recognizes that our schools do not currently have enough staff trained to provide meaningful evaluative and non-evaluative feedback to teachers. To expand the number of people who can do so, the Representative Assembly directs NEA to examine existing mentorship, peer assistance and peer assistance and review programs, and report back to the October 2011 NEA Board meeting regarding those programs, their compliance with the requirements set forth in D-10 (Mentor Programs) and D-11(Peer Assistance Programs and Peer Assistance & Review Programs), and to make programmatic recommendations as to whether to expand such programs or develop others in partnership with state and local associations.

II. High Quality Teacher Accountability Systems

NEA believes that teachers are accountable for high quality instruction that advances student learning. High quality teacher accountability systems, developed and implemented with teachers and their representatives either through collective bargaining where available, or in partnership with the affiliate representing teachers at the state and local level, should be based on the following principles.

a. All teachers are responsible for providing a high quality education to students and supporting the efforts of colleagues and their school as a whole to do the same. To fulfill that responsibility, teachers have the right to a safe and supportive working environment including ongoing non-evaluative feedback on their practice that supports teachers’ efforts to innovate and the right to regular, confidential evaluations.

b. All teachers have the responsibility to continually enhance their practice and to stay current in subject matter and pedagogical approaches by reflecting and acting on feedback received, accessing professional development opportunities provided and collaborating with colleagues to enhance instruction. To fulfill that responsibility, teachers have the right to increased autonomy over instructional practices, time during the school day for collaboration with colleagues, a decisionmaking role in professional development, and the right to have such development tailored to enhancing skills identified as needing improvement in both non-evaluative feedback and in evaluations, as well as the ability to pursue advanced coursework and degrees as part of professional development.

c. If, through a high quality evaluation system, a teacher’s practice fails to meet performance standards, a teacher should be provided with clear notice of the deficiencies and an improvement plan should be developed by the teacher, local association and employer. The improvement plan should provide the teacher with a reasonable opportunity ““ including time, high quality professional development and support ““ to meet expectations. In addition, the teacher should receive regular and frequent feedback from the district and the local association regarding his or her progress during the support program period. What constitutes a reasonable opportunity will depend on the nature of the deficiencies identified, but in no event should an improvement plan exceed one school year. During the period in which a teacher is implementing an improvement plan, the district shall provide a support program mutually agreed upon by the district and the local association, which shall include the assignment of an accomplished teacher to assist the teacher, not meeting performance standards in approving his or her practice and to ensure a quality education for that teacher’s students.

d. If a teacher fails to improve despite being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, or otherwise fails to meet expectations, the teacher may be counseled to leave the profession or be subject to fair, transparent and efficient dismissal process that provides due process. Such a process should include: notice to a teacher of the basis for the dismissal; early disclosure of all evidence on which the dismissal is based; an early mandatory meeting between the teacher, employer and the teacher’s representative to discuss possible resolution; and, failing such resolution, a prompt hearing before an impartial decisionmaker on the charges.

e. NEA believes that it is appropriate and fitting for accountability systems to continue to differentiate between the rights and responsibilities of probationary teachers, meaning those teachers in their initial years of employment who may be nonrenewed upon notice at the end of a school year, and career teachers, meaning those teachers who have successfully served through the probationary period and may be dismissed only for cause as defined by state law or local agreement or policy.

. Probationary teachers should receive ongoing support for at least the first two years of their employment from locally developed and fully supported induction programs. The focus of such induction programs should be supportive and non-evaluative, designed to provide beginning teachers with the support they need to learn and thrive in the teaching profession. Districts should be encouraged to partner with colleges and universities to develop joint induction programs. No beginning teacher should go for weeks, much less years, without receiving any feedback on their practice.

. Probationary teachers should become career teachers if they meet or exceed expectations at the conclusion of their probationary employment period as defined by state law. A probationary teacher should have the right to require that the school district conduct the necessary evaluations within this time period, so that an appropriate determination can be made as to career status.

. Probationary teachers who meet or exceed expectations at the conclusion of their probationary employment period as defined by state law, and who are not granted career status, should have the right to contest that denial before an impartial decisionmaker.

. Once a probationary teacher has attained career status, that status should not be lost and should be portable from one school district to another within a state. If a career teacher’s performance fails to meet expectations, the teacher may be counseled out of the profession or dismissed pursuant to a fair, transparent and efficient dismissal procedure that provides due process.

. Career teachers have the responsibility to reflect upon and enhance their own practice and to support and enhance the practice of their colleagues, particularly probationary teachers. NEA encourages local affiliates to institutionalize opportunities for career teachers to provide such support and enhance the practice of their colleagues by way of including in collective bargaining agreements or local policies provisions supporting professional learning communities, partnerships with local/regional institutions of higher education, mentorship and peer assistance programs.

III. The Role of the Association in High Quality Evaluation and Accountability Systems

The development, implementation and enforcement of high quality evaluation and accountability systems are top priorities of NEA and its affiliates, presenting new opportunities and work for the Association and its affiliates. The Representative Assembly therefore directs that NEA support that work by providing the training, resources (including model fair dismissal procedures and other model language) needed to develop, implement and enforce high quality evaluation and accountability systems that enhance instruction and improve student learning.