Friday Blessing...Here's the 'Why'

“Take care of yourself. Take care of each other. Buckle up. Hug a dad or a mother. Tell someone you love them.” I know it’s not grammatical. It should end, “Tell someone you love him or her.” Blech. Not gonna happen. “Tell someone you love them” completed our classroom charm.

I seldom forgot in the hectic days, but occasionally I did. Most often, students reminded me to yell at them. They waited, they joined me. It became a sacred tradition.

My motives were simple—I wanted to remind every one of my students, even the ones who were hard to love, that they were precious to the world. They had important relationships in this world. They had responsibilities to friends and family, and to themselves. I wanted the last words they heard from me to be a reminder of how easy it is to be positive, to reach out and make a difference. 

I wanted to create a classroom with mutual trust and respect were paramount. That trust and respect had to start with me...from the first day, from the first Friday. And continue every day, every Friday. Forever.

Sometimes I was the mom who received the hugs, and I accepted them gratefully. Sometimes I was the one who heard, "I love you." I would tell students they'd need to tell someone else too! It was a festive way to end the week -- we all were smiling as we said goodbye. 

I wanted to challenge them to be their best selves all weekend, and to come back to me on Monday, ready to learn. I want to remind them that someone cares about them, believes in them. Trusts them.

Take care of yourself – make good decisions, stay safe.

Take care of each other – look out for friends and family and strangers, reach out to others. Be kind.

Buckle up – please, please, please

Hug a dad or a mother – make a connection with a parent who’s doing the best he can to raise up a kid. Acknowledge her efforts.

Tell someone you love them – acknowledge the power of those words in another's life

Now, I ‘yell’ virtually on Facebook and Twitter. I post every Friday morning and then sit back and wait. It’s a class reunion for me as I watch to see who likes the post, or responds, or shares or retweets. I get to see former students from years past…over twenty years worth of students, all coming by to say, “Hi. I remember. I’m still living up to that charm.” I know the relationships we've forged through our Friday blessing has continued to grow, even after they have left my class, after they've made careers, built families of their own.

Over the years, former students have taken the blessing with them into their lives. Some print their own version on a bulletin board in their dorm room…Others designed original art: a poster or even a meme. One friend paraphrases the blessing to fit her own life and shares it every week with her friends and family. It makes me proud to see others adopt the words into their own lives. I love when they tag me on their own creations. I'm proud they continue to see value in the relationship we've created.

This year, Erin Raiber, a former student is beginning her own journey as a teacher and asked if she could copy my blessing to yell at her students. I love that idea! Those words are still ringing in classrooms…kids are still sitting impatiently to hear the words wash over them. These new students are recognizing their teacher cares enough to send them home for the weekend blessed and protected by love. Relationships are continuing to be strengthened with the words and the meaning behind them. Erin will carry these words into classrooms I'll never see, blessing students I'll never know. 

Now, when you see my posts on Friday, you'll know the rest of the story. These words have power…if not to protect, at least to remind you someone cares, wants the best for you, and holds high expectations of your behavior. The words are the manifestation of the connections we've forged and continue to build every week. 

Take care of yourself. 

Take care of each other.

Buckle up

Hug a dad 

...or a mother

Tell someone you love them!

Miss Erin Raiber, I am so proud of you, and so excited to share my blessing with you. I hope your teaching career is as fulfilling as mine was, even with the sad times. I think my blessing was really about giving me hope and reminding me what really matters in the classroom. 

"But...But...But..."

Superintendent Barresi certainly enjoys benefits from being the incumbent in a large group of candidates currently running for her position. She has friends on the editorial board at Daily Oklahoman who regularly supports her positions against all comers.

She can also submit opinion pieces and be assured of considerable inches in the prime-time Sunday edition.

She took advantage of those benefits this week and published an opinion piece designed to head off criticism of her beloved A-F school grades that dramatically illustrate that schools of children in poverty do not fare well…that her beloved A-F really carefully measures the economic status of the parents whose kids attend school. Even the headline, “Poverty not an excuse…” attacks the educators by implication.

Her big opening sounds promising:

“Does poverty have a significant impact on a child’s academic performance? Of course.

Are such problems a considerable obstacle for a student to overcome? Absolutely.

Is poverty, then, good enough of a reason to hold these children to low expectations that essentially relegate them to a lesser education?

No way!”

Look at the two first statements. She seems to agree with critics. But, it's that insincere smile to get close enough to shove her shiv between our ribs with the next two sentences. Nicely played. Surprises no one. We knew it was coming and have made plans to deflect the blade

She’s implying that educators regularly and systematically have low expectations for our students.

What ‘relegates’ poor kids to a ‘lesser education?’ She wants us to believe it’s the educators who work in the schools. Could it be the highest percentage of cuts to education in the country? Could it be bigger classrooms, fewer counselors, fewer librarians? What about less money to replace aging computer labs? What about no money for school libraries to buy new titles? How are educators responsible for any of these real outcomes?

Our policy makers in Oklahoma have turned their backs on our children, at the same time blaming the woes of the schools on the dedicated professionals who do the work. Our policy makers spend valuable resources on a testing climate that helps no one but the testing corporations, and has been proven to be detrimental to real intellectual growth in our kids.

Our policy makers have tricked the public into voting for measures that will severely damage schools in the future. Corporate tax cuts and credits also cut available funds to schools. The picture will get bleaker very quickly.

Three statements in Superintendent Barresi’s editorial raised my English-teacher ire…

“It would be folly to deny the effects of poverty, but that should not, and cannot, allow for its acceptance. Poverty is a factor, not an excuse.”

And

“Schools alone can’t break the cycle of poverty, but providing a solid education for children in poverty can be a huge step toward giving them a pathway to a different future.”

And, only because I know she doesn’t mean a word of this statement, I’m adding it:

“It will take a tremendous effort, but Oklahoma educators are more than up to the task.”

One description of the conjunction 'but' is adversative...what a wonderful word. What a true word in this case. That ‘but’ takes away everything in the clause it follows – its purpose is to slap us with the fact she’s right, and we’re wrong… with that one little word, she implies we DO accept poverty…we DO use it as an excuse. We DON’T support breaking the cycle of poverty.

Think of how we use the word ‘but’ – “He’s such a nice boy, but dumb…She’s so sweet, but ugly.” It negates everything…it contrasts, it sets up the real truth in the statement, after a positive beginning. It’s the snark that says, “You didn’t really believe me before, did you?”

So, two statements that are serious slaps at educators, and we’re supposed to believe her last “but” statement at face value, “but Oklahoma educators are more than up to the task?” Ironically, we are, but she doesn’t believe it. This is her pretense to play nice, to show her total support of Oklahoma educators. Educators she hopes will vote for her, right after she gently withdraws the blade between our ribs and pats the bleeding wound. If educators DO vote for her, they deserve this continued abuse. Unfortunately, the rest of us suffer too.

And then there’s: “This is a matter of civil rights.” Many conservative pundits use that phrase, trying to co-opt the civil rights struggle for their own purpose. They want to provide vouchers and charter schools as ways to address inequity.

How about funding schools? Hiring and retaining dedicated career teachers? Assuring library books and working technology in every school?

Yes, equity in education IS a civil rights issue. Here are some ugly facts missing from this fluff-piece: 21,000 children in Oklahoma are homeless.  Also, In Oklahoma, 24% of our children come to us from poor families. According to a very recent study, 85% of variability in school performance is attributable to economic well being of students’ families. Oklahoma schools did not fare any better. The Center for Public Education has combined 19 research studies on class size, and has concluded lowering class size leads to higher achievement, especially in early grades, with an experienced teacher.

No matter how great, teachers cannot combat these realities in the classroom. We need politicians brave enough to do the right thing. If our policy makers were serious about tackling poverty in our schools as the new civil rights issue, let them start here, not on the friendly pages of the DOK

“It would be folly to deny the effects of poverty,” but politicians will continue to ignore and deny in their quest to blame educators.

“It will take a tremendous effort,” but educators will stand alone in this battle.

“Schools alone can’t break the cycle of poverty,” but educators will be charged to do just that, and blamed when we cannot.

Questions We WISH Media Would Ask our Superintendent

I get frustrated watching interviews of politicians on the talk shows, both national and state. To my husband's irritation, I often yell at the interviewers: "Ask him THIS. Ask your question again -- she didn't answer it. Ask this follow-up question!!" 

Too often politicians are given a free pass on the tough questions and are allowed to simply spout their talking points, taking all the time for the interview, and never having to face an honest question.

It happened on "Flash Point" last month when Superintendent Barresi appeared. No substantive, knowledgeable questions were asked. My Facebook friends and I brainstormed some questions WE would have asked, if anyone consulted us. The questions we wished the media would have asked. The questions that are important. We vented, and some of our questions were rude and funny and pointed. Then we got down to the business of what questions must be asked of our policy makers.

A few of us compiled questions and then read them to work on the tone of the questions. There may still be flashes of anger and frustration in these questions, because educators feel deep anger and frustration at non-educators sweeping the airwaves with their 'reform' messages.  Many of the Oklahoma 'reform' soundbites neatly parallel American Legislative Exchange Council and Jeb Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education. Both these groups have corporate reform as their goal: high stakes testing to promote students, evaluate teachers, and grade schools, weakening of teacher organizations, and privatizing schools with vouchers and online schools.They support more and more testing in the schools, which drains needed funds from the classroom.

So, here are our questions for Superintendent Barresi on two of her achievements: the third grade retention law, and A-F report card law, both modeled after legislation in Florida. Had our state examined the Florida experiences with these laws, we would have seen deep flaws, that after ten years, have not been solved. But here we are, following blindly, instead of leading the way for Oklahoma's children.

Third Grade Retention/Reading Sufficiency Law

The decision to promote or retain students has historically been made with multiple measures, by a team of educators and the parents. Now one test will determine a student’s fate. What is your response to the parents of a third-grader who are upset that they are being left out of the decision to promote or not promote their child to the fourth grade if the child does not pass the third-grade reading test?

The preponderance of research shows holding a child back based on only one subject (reading, for instance), and not being allowed to promote with their peers, is detrimental. Numerous studies  show retention based on test scores does not improve student achievement or progress through school. Please provide us with the research base used to promote this law, and  share the studies that refute the previously-referenced evidence.

How are schools going to accommodate all the third graders who fail? Those testing unsatisfactory are supposed to be retested in November and if they pass, they will rejoin their fourth grade class mid term. At that point, they will be twelve weeks behind their peers. How does this make sense? What do you see this looking like in a classroom?

Are the 3rd grade reading test scores guaranteed to be certified and published by the beginning of the school year next year in order to make timely retention decisions? 

What provisions should elementary schools make for the staffing needs of third and fourth grades next year? Schools need student numbers at the beginning of the summer in order to make their decisions. With students retained, but possibly moving to the next grade in the middle of the year, what is your recommendation to schools for assuring proper staffing at both levels?

State remediation funding from OSDE to schools is less than $80 per child, from which schools are expected to provide professional development to teachers, supplies for remediation, and salaries for tutors. Explain this allocation, and give districts some guidance in how to stretch this money to provide robust remediation.

A-F Report Cards

The recent research study by research scientists at our two leading universities, peer-reviewed by a Distinguished Professor Emeritus, identified major flaws in our current Report Card Grades. Please cite the mistakes in their research. Cite other education research to support your position, besides the in-house ‘study’ prepared by your own office. What other peer-reviewed, recognized research can you cite?

What kind of accountability will there be in the OSDE office for the troubled roll-out of this year’s school and district grades? What is your response to the frustrations of parents and educators who saw grades change more than once?

What are your plans to adjust the system to account for new schools with no testing data and for schools that are configured in a way that does not fit your model? Why did these schools receive an inaccurate grade instead of no grade?

What is your response to the troubles with Florida’s Report Card the last 10 years: changing formulas, inaccurate data, and flawed scores? How are you working to avoid the same here?

A school's grade is dependent on test scores for a small group of its students, thus rewarding or punishing schools on small samples of test scores. What are your plans to expand the accountability measures to better represent the accomplishments and struggles of schools?

Please address specific concerns about details

• What are your plans to adjust the system to account for brand new schools with no testing data, and schools that are configured in ways that do not fit your model?

• Why is 50% of a school's grade based on growth from assessments that are not designed to measure growth?

• What is the reasoning for counting the lowest students’ scores multiple times? How does this give an accurate picture of a school?

Reviving the "Reading Wars" for Political Gain, Dr. Barresi?

Now I'm just mad...really mad. Dr. B has wandered into my turf, reading education, and she's saying some really stupid extremely uninformed and unhelpful things. I am a reading specialist, with a masters in secondary reading. I've taught 39 years, in library, English, elementary, special education (where 75% of my students were not misidentified). I've taught every grade K-12 in some capacity. That introduction hopefully will give credibility.

We all make sense of our world through our stories. That's just who we are. So it's not surprising that Dr. Barresi, who had two sons who struggled with reading, would make sense of reading education through their experiences. I get that. And on behalf of my profession, I sincerely apologize for the fact they didn't get the kind of education they needed in our schools. Her sons needed a phonetic approach, even into middle school, it sounds like...that's an unusual story, but a valid one.

But, our own story blinds us to the fact that others have stories that are just as real and just as valid, and that is what Dr. Barresi has done...she's blinded herself to others' stories.

I share my stories here: I was taught to read at the height of the 'see and say' movement--lots of memorization and repetition. Who can forget: "Look, Jane. Look. Look. Look. See Spot. See Spot run"? This approach was accidentally the exact right approach for me. I'm a visual learner who liked memorizing. I thrived.

My son? He learned, mostly through phonics. And another happy occurance. He's a strong phonetic learner. Sounding out words made great sense to him...much more than to me sometimes, sitting next to him. And guess what? He grew up to be a musician.

My daughter? Another non-phonetic learner. Her school believed in an eclectic approach to beginning reading...phonics, memorization, and, yes...gasp...whole language. What a gift this reading program was for children. It allowed every reader to find his strengths. It allowed every child to find her success. The teachers honored every child's story. But she still had that mom-volunteer who read with her every week who asked, without fail, "Well, can you sound out yet?" Laurie was trained to say, "No, not yet. But that's ok. I can read."

I share stories just to show you we all have 'em. And 30+ years teaching literacy to students has taught me to value and respect every one. NOT just my own.

Eight years at the elementary level, teaching remedial readers taught me that every third grader can read...maybe not at level, yet. But they all read. Dr. Barresi and other critics blithely label kids who don't read at level as 'nonreaders'. I won't call this a lie...but a blazing untruth. Dr. Barresi recently told a group of Republican voters that a third grader who scored 'Limited Knowledge' on one standardized test was two grades below level...gasp...Ummm. Not so much. A child scoring 'Limited Knowledge' could have missed 'Proficient' by one question. ONE. 

Okeducationtruths pointed out in a recent blog, 'Limited Knowledge' is the difference between one and eight correct questions on a test, one day in April. If eight questions on one test mean two grade levels, there's something inherently wrong...with the test. Not the third grader.

As a remedial reading teacher, I learned to honor each student's unique story and strengths. In my eight years as elementary remedial reading teacher, I only saw one upper-elementary nonreader. But, man, could that little guy give me letter sounds. "Cuh-Ahhh-Tuh...Duh-Oooh-Guh." Trouble was, no one helped him see that was only step one. Phonics alone actually handicapped his ability to make sense out of print. We set him up with books on tape, and lots of seeing the words (visual) and hearing the words (phonics) and repetition (that see-and-say). And we had a reader! He read his first book to anyone and everyone. He read with expression and confidence. We honored his story and we helped him find his reading voice.

In my 25+ years in secondary, I used that same eclectic approach...books, lots of them. An authentic audience for reading and for thoughts about reading. Time dedicated for practice. Writing with reading. I did not go back and reteach phonics. That would be counterproductive. Most struggling secondary readers are non-phonetic learners like me, like my daughter. To force-feed more phonics would have been the wrong professional decision. But some might well need that extra dose, now when their brains are ready to process. 

I did meet one secondary non-reader. He had been 'homeschooled' by a very tired grandmother who was not up the challenge of an energetic boy who, frankly, did not want to learn. This guy came to us at 14, essentially illiterate. The first ever in my career. We started a program of phonics in isolation (Cuh-Ahh-Tuh) and lots of easy books with word patterns and predictable stories. We were dealing with attitude problems and behavior problems, self-esteem, probably some serious special education issues, and reading problems. As with my first example, this young man disappeared from our school before we could properly diagnose his difficulties and address them systematically, just as we were learning his story.

There's an old saying, 'If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.' It fits here. Untrained folks see every learner as a mirror for their own experiences. They think everyone learns the same way they did. They know what worked for them, and they make that leap that it's good for us all. 

A student, a learner, who doesn't follow their trajectory is a nail who must be hammered into submission. and that will have high costs to the child in the future. We tried that. It didn't work.

What wise educators have learned is our kids are not ideological nails -- they're learners. And if we don't have a full tool box of lots of research-based approaches and ideas to use as needed, we will not reach every child.

Learning to read is as individual as learning to talk...Seldom will a first grade teacher (now kindergarten) have two students who learn the identical way. She's got to be versatile, knowledgeable, well-trained. She must be observant and reflective. She must listen to parents and their concerns and their stories. From that comes the teaching and the learning.

In her remarks, she says, “I’m now finding out … University of Oklahoma believes in Whole Language. So they’re teaching Whole Language.” The use of the evil "Whole Language" boogey man was purposeful...it recalls the ideological 'wars' between two competing approaches. Whole language was seen as the progressive (read liberal) approach to teaching reading, while phonics was the traditional (read conservative) approach. Dr. Barresi was talking to a group of Republican voters, and she was deliberately evoking distrust of academics, of learning that looks different from their own stories, and of those 'liberal teachers.' While it seemed to come out of left field, it was purposeful and divisive. She wants to discredit not only the universities that produce our teachers, but our teachers as well.

And a hat-tip to OU for giving its students another tool to use in teaching beginning reading, along with all the other tools, including phonics, phonemic awareness, word families, context...we could go on and on. Of course we want young teachers who have been well trained to approach all kinds of learners.

So, Dr B. whole language is not the spawn of the devil...it's a tool in the toolbox of a well-educated teacher. For some students, this focus on the whole, on making sense, is perfect. We use real books, magazines, newspapers. We use students' own writing. We celebrate initial steps into literacy. No experienced, professional teacher of emergent readers uses only this approach. It's not sustainable for everyone. But phonics as the entire approach is not the answer either. Many of the stuents in our classes are like me and my daughter...we try to sound out, and it becomes a mush. Much better for us to try to figure out what word makes sense in the sentence...and move on.

I circle back to the idea of stories...we each have one. We're all the heroes and heroines of our own stories. They make sense of the world for us. They are precious.

A teacher in a class of 18 (20? 25?) students knows he's dealing with that many stories. That many back stories -- as well as parents' and grandparents' stories. That many ways to make learning happen. This is the truth non-educators don't grasp. We, as their teachers, tried to honor their stories as we taught. At the same time, we were also responsible for the stories of every other student in their classroom. To assume there was only one story, to impose ONE theory or reading and teaching will invariably leave someone behind...leave someone out. Maybe that's what happened to Dr. Barresi's sons. I was lucky as a mom, and my children got the tools they needed. I used that observation in my own classroom all those years, and tried to teach every student to his and her strengths.

Dr. Barresi, please listen to the dedicated educators in your state. We have thousands of student stories to share. 

Vexatious! To the Max!

I have been watching in dismay as Oklahoma's A-F school grading system has exploded in our faces. Scores were released to districts, changed, changed again, and again, and again. Schools sat helplessly as their grades jumped up and down, right in front of their faces. When educators began questioning the grades, a real donnybrook broke out.

Policy makers spoke with arrogant disdain, blaming and threatening schools and educators: it's schools' fault; we'll cut your funding if you don't stop pointing out problems.Both our Superintendent of Public Instruction and Governor have responded with venom and a bad word. Grades like A-F are 'easy' to understand, the 'reformer's tell us. Everyone know what an "A" is. Well, maybe not. When the formula is so complex that the OSDE spent a week changing, rearranging, lowering, grades, must not be so simple. But that's their mantra. Easy-to-understand. Just hard to manipulate to get the grade they want, I guess.

I have read everything I can (yes, I am a reading teacher!). I read the OU/OSU report pointing out the inherent weaknesses of this, our second attempt to grade schools on test scores.This report, by research scientists from our two major universities, peer reviewed, has been dismissed by our leaders, because they 'don't believe' the foundations and the findings. Methinks they don't understand how education research works. Not a surprise, since neither our Governor nor our Superintendent is an educator.

 I've read the blogs of my very smart teacher friends, here and here and here and here and here and here as they dissect the mind-boggling intricacies of the rules and the monumental failings of our policy makers. I'm so grateful for their insights, and so confused, even after reading them.

Not being smart enough to write a proper critique of the system, I have come back to my own territory of asking why?

Why are policy makers going to this ridiculous extreme to 'hold schools accountable?'

And why are we misusing standardized tests to do something they are not designed to do?

The stars aligned this morning as I read the front page of our local newspaper. We have a 'Word of the Day,' and today's was 'vexatious' -- "troublesome, annoying...legal action instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance." There is is. There's the answer to my first question...kinda sorta.

This rule, I absolutely believe, is designed to deflate grades for schools, to frighten parents who are traditionally happy with their neighborhood schools. If grades are artificially low, parents may panic and charters, online schools, parent triggers, and vouchers may be more attractive. Our current Superintendent of Public Instruction is on record as supporting charters and vouchers. Her proposed budget includes a 300% increase for Charter School Incentives, and only 4% increase of the school formula, money available to all the public schools in the state. Last year, cut scores on the Biology End-of-Instruction exam were lowered drastically, above the recommendations of the educator committee whose job -- they thought -- was to set the cut score. They made their recommendation, left, and were horrified to see their recommendations were ignored. It seems as if data is being manipulated, and money is being invested in line with our leader's priorities.

We fought last year's Parent Trigger bill, but we know it will reappear. DDS Barresi, our Superintendent, is enthusiastic about vouchers...but if the A-F can show dismal results of even strong suburban schools, perhaps support for her projects will increase.

So, in my mind, there's the 'why A-F?' To give the false impression that public schools are failing. How sad the push is coming from the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Shouldn't she be the elected leader protecting and advocating for our schools?

On to my second question, and the one that vexes me the most.

Why do we use/misuse/abuse standardized tests to torture out 'grades' that show whatever the manipulators of the numbers want them to show? Why do policy makers continue to ignore evidence that test scores are not, never have been, never will be, designed to evaluate teachers, or grade schools, or flunk our students.

Every adult has taken tests. We all did, we know what it feels like to sit and fill in bubbles at school. I think this fact works against those of us who are fighting the current testing climate. The tests we remember were not high stakes. The high stakes tests we have taken were choices -- ACT or SAT to get into college, GRE to continue into graduate school, professional exams to enter medical school or law school, tests to show proficiency in a chosen field of endeavor. We were not subjected to the battery of tests our kids are, with the consequences attached.

I've read numerous books about school reform, and two of my go-to books are The Myths of Standardized Tests and Reign of Error. I returned to these for evidence.

Standardized tests are a snapshot in time. They are not an accurate picture of learning, of teaching, or of achievement. They do not predict much more than a student's performance on her next test. But they're cheap to administer and score and report and they give the appearance of scientific measures. The authors of Myths quote Larry Barber: "More than once, I explained to legislators...as clearly and simply as I could, that standardized test scores were just too haphazard a measure to tell...whose school was better...in short they were a waste of good money that could have been better spent in interesting and innovative efforts to improve instruction...but no one wanted to hear that." Policy makers love tests...the tests they never took, the tests they'll never be held accountable for. The tests they gleefully pay for, instead of investing in our classrooms.

Test scores seem to have the veneer of 'objective' measures. So, policy makers love to use them, and say they're measures of learning and teaching. That's the foundation of A-F -- hold schools 'accountable' for learning by testing our kids. And testing. And testing. Tests do not measure learning. They do not predict learning. They predict the score on the next test.

Ravitch tells us, "The over reliance on and misuse of testing and data have created a sense of crisis, lending credibility to claims that American public education is failing and in decline...more testing does not make children smarter. More testing does not reduce achievement gaps."

It seems like even committed educators have stopped arguing that we are abusing the intent of the tests, as we also abuse our kids. I want that to be our call to action. No more high stakes tests. Period. Go back to the practices of our childhood: tests as one piece of information in a student's permanent file. One number that represents performance on one day, and will predict performance on the test next year. That is the proper place for standardized tests, not ruling education policy, flunking third graders, denying high school graduates their diploma, evaluating teachers, grading schools.

Until schools can be fairly evaluated based on their demographics, their instructional program, co-curricular programs, parent involvement, equity and access, and the well-being of our students, we must resist, both the use of high stakes testing, and the results of high stakes testing. We must trust parents to know what happens in our schools. We must strive for real school improvement, real professional learning, real student learning. Won't find any of that on a test.

Book Review: REACHING AND TEACHING STUDENTS IN POVERTY by Paul Gorski

Sometimes books find us at the right time, and become part of our ongoing conversations in many ways. This is one of those books. I've talked to NBCTs about Gorski's discussion of equity, and I've shared quotes in conversations about the recent cuts to the SNAP program. This is an important book for all educators to read and think about. It's important for citizens to become informed, not with the narratives of 'my sister's friend was on welfare...My mother knew a woman on welfare who had an iPhone' They do NOT help us educate our students. They do NOT help us assist parents in overcoming the opportunity gaps that keep their children from succeeding.

If we really care about all students' education, we must read and discuss this book. We must shift our own thinking, and look carefully at how we structure our schools and our parent outreach. No longer is is all right to say, 'Well, we had Open House -- those parents just don't care about their children.' We must be honest about our own contributions to the barriers many parents suffer.

"...low income people face innumerable inequities in and out of schools. These inequities regarding access to everything from adequately funded schools to playgrounds to prenatal care have nothing to do with poor people's cultures and everything to do with what Jonathan Kozol called the 'savage inequalities' of schools and society. We, as a society, give low-income youths less access to educational opportunity, healthcare, nutrition, and other goods, and then blame the outcomes of these inequities on their 'culture of poverty.'"

Not an easy read...not a feel-good read. This challenges the reader to look closely and deeply at some assumptions and stereotypes we may bring to our work with kids from low-income families. 

Gorski takes us step-by-step from a shattering of the myth of the 'culture of poverty.' He is careful in his title to not talk about kids OF poverty, but kids IN poverty. Not an accident of word choice...a deliberate choice of a careful practioner.

We as educators must confront our own biases, well-meaning as they may be. We need to develop an new kind of literacy...equity literacy. We must push back against those soft-bigotry statements: Poor parents don't care about education; they're lazy,drug-addicted abusers who can't communicate and obviously care little about their children.

It's important to turn this around. Achievement gaps can be explained by examining OPPORTUNITY gaps...those resources most of us take for granted that poor families don't have..healthcare, prenatal care, dental care...living and working conditions that are safe...recreation opportunities, with money and time and transportation NON-issues...community and social services access...affordable childcare...enrichment opportunities...a society that validates our efforts. Poor families, because they may be working two or three low-paying jobs, with little free time and no disposable cash, do NOT have these opportunities to support their families.

We think of their inabilities as deficits, but we must stop...they are barriers to opportunity. Poor families have just as much resiliency as others when we help dismantle the barriers.

So, how do these gaps affect families' ability to thrive? Preschool, schools with adequate funding and resources such as libraries, shadow education (those ACT prep classes and tutoring and camp activities WE offer our own kids), support services, high expectations, WELL-PAID, CERTIFIED, EXPERIENCED TEACHERS (not 5-week wonders from TFA), higher-order, challenging curricula, the opportunity to include parents fully in their children's education. What are the barriers? TIME and TRANSPORTATIOM, a LIVING WAGE, to name a few.

Gorski lists the ineffective practices in schools: cutting arts and music programs, direct, scripted, instruction, tracking of students, and charter schools.

He tells us what works: Arts programs, high expectations, higher-order, student-centered pedagogies, movement and PE, relevancy in the schools, teaching everyone about biases, analyzing materials for bias, and my favorite: LITERACY ENJOYMENT!! Woohoo!

"The most powerful strategy is to create cultures that promote reading enjoyment...literacy instruction should not focus solely on reading or writing mechanics. More to the point, tho, it means that we ought to find ways to foster in students excitement about reading and writing even when they respond reluctantly at first… 1. Institute literature circles 2. Provide reading material options that align with stated interest of students 3. Use a variety of media…that engage students actively and interactively 4. Incorporate drama into literacy instructions."

I love the chapter entitled 'THE MOTHER OF ALL STRATEGIES" and I concur...building relationships IS the mother of all. Relationships with our students and relationships with their parents. It's not enough to set up conference times and then smugly say, 'well, we offered time for these parents to come to school. They must not be interested.' That's the same as the teacher who says, 'Well, I taught it, the students didn't get it.' I hate both of these messages...they point back to that deficit mindset. We need to ask ourselves how hard we tried...did we take into consideration work schedules, transportation, childcare? Did we really do everything we could to invite parents who may have negative feelings about schools? Did we truly show our value for them and their children? Were we creative in our problem solving, or did we simply shrug and blame the parents?

I've had a couple of conversations with professionals about 'those parents' who don't care...and I'm learning to offer alternative ways of thinking about the facts in a gentle push back. Which leads to the last chapter: SPHERES OF INFLUENCE...what IS my sphere? What can I do?

He suggests we do our job with sensitivity and respect...that is our sphere, but he says, "...when we do anything, anything at all, to push back against the defunding of schools or the underfunding of education mandates and to resist the imposition of corporate-style accountability and high-stakes testing, we are also advocating, whether we know it or not, for low-income students. Of course, we also are self-advocating, which is an added bonus."

He offers advocacy goals: preschool, community agency access, smaller classes, ongoing PD for teachers, access to healthcare, PE, arts and music. Surely every one of us could choose ONE of these issues to become advocates for.

Important book...I read it twice, once highlighting, the second, collecting all those quotes for reference later. Would make great reading for our legislators who continue to chip away at the few support systems poor families have.

What do Parents Want?

I was reading a blog this morning by the Goddess of YA Literature, Teri Lesene, about the NEA brochure, cheerleading for CCSS...an 'everything we want you to know about CCSS whether it's true or not' kind of a brochure. After critiquing the brochure, she latched onto one line and reflected:

     "Here, to me, is the biggest flaw of the NEA brochure and more:

     "Ask any parent or educator what they want more for their student(s), and this is what they'll say: "I want      them to be successful'

     NOPE. I want them to be happy. I want them to love themselves. I want them to treat others with                respect. I want so much more than for them to be successful as measured by Coleman and Rhee and            their cronies."

You see why I love Teri's voice.

And, I can't help being snarky. I just finished reading Diane Ravitch's Reign of Error, and was in awe of the precision of her writing -- the message was strong, and the writing was flawless...she would never have allowed the grammatical mistake in the NEA statement: "Ask any parent what THEY want?" Sorry, NEA...agreement still matters. "Ask parents what they want" or "Ask any parent what he or she wants." Educators must not be sloppy writers.

Well, unlike NEA who assumes, I asked. Several years ago, I compiled their answers, and am eager to share -- maybe NEA needs to read this too -- what real parents want for their children. I think they'd agree with the Goddess as I do.

"My students are precious to me; but they are treasures to their parents. These parents send us their children with hopes and dreams, with aspirations that go far beyond a test score or a GPA. Parents know what their children need, but now I see a gap between policy makers’ expectations, and the fierce dreams of parents.  I fear schools are letting our parents and our students down as we respond to the policymakers’ demands.

At the beginning of each semester, I ask my parents, ‘what are your dreams and hopes for your child in this class, and beyond?’ Reading their answers gives me insight into what parents value for their children and expect from me.

Parents want their children to achieve, to succeed, to work hard, and to challenge themselves academically. A thread of high expectations for authentic achievement runs through my parents’ messages.  

• ·         I hope she finds her fit in high school and apply herself
• ·         I hope she learns the importance of a good education
• ·         Hard work really does pay off
• ·         She will continue to expand and enjoy reading
• ·         To remember the more he reads, the better he writes
• ·         I wish she would read more historical based fiction
• ·         I yearn for her to read those great classics that we grew up reading
• ·         I am excited to hear about the books he reads this semester as he expands his vocabulary and mind
• ·         To continue her excellent academic accomplishments and be happy as well

Also, finding a love of learning and life-long literacy.

• ·         To learn the joy of reading again
• ·         I hope she recaptures the love she had for school as a young girl
• ·         That she’s bold and brave in going after her dreams
• ·         I hope she will broaden her interests and try books outside her usual choices
• ·         I want her to have a real passion for reading
• ·         I hope she develops a love for reading…and will be open to new interests
• ·         I hope that he will continue to read for pleasure as an adult
• ·         To learn to choose reading as a leisure activity
• ·         He’s not a huge reader of fiction, and I love it when he finds fiction that interests him

And  learning to become productive adults:

• ·         My hopes are that he has a wonderful…career that fills his life with happiness
• ·         I expect him to make a difference in the community and the world
• ·         I want her to find out what inspires her
• ·         We want him to find himself in your class.
• 
  

Only one mother mentioned standardized tests. Her son performs well academically and athletically. He wants to attend college and begin a career in sports physical therapy. But, despite his grades and work ethic, he must perform well on ONE test, in order to have that opportunity. His mother understands his entire future rests on that score:  “He has the ability to attend college but first must score well on the ACT and SAT.” Her fervent wish is for that one test, that one day, to reflect her son’s potential, even though his grades and on-the-field performance have already done so.

Parents, if we ask and then listen, are eloquent about the future they want for their children and they know achievement must be measured in many way, with tests being one measure. Bureaucrats love tests and the scores they generate. They want students and their teachers to be distilled into a score. Parents know better. They know we need to educate their children, not for a test, but with a focus on our students’ futures as productive citizens, readers and writers.

Policymakers love to talk about ‘raising the bar’ which usually means making tests harder. My parents know our students have much greater challenges ahead than one test, one day. My parents expect me to help our students learn for a lifetime of achievement. A simplistic focus on test scores does not serve any of us.

When will policymakers listen to parents and teachers and realize we are accountable for achievement far more precious and complex than a test score?"