Class+04+-+Feb+16

=** Class 4 **= **Class Notes** :

**Clarifications for the class notes this week** :

**Clarifications, points, and questions work pursuing for future weeks (Extend the discussion from this week's class):**


 * Responses to the "Bridging Differences" Blog found at : [] Be sure to clearly state which posting you are referring to.** ** Just as a reminder, everyone needs to post something in this category as well as at least one in the one of the above categories. ** ** You should have two postings total this week. **

When I was reading the “Bridging Differences” blog dated Feb. 25th, 2010, I agree with Debbie’s post to Diane. Having these standards created in the schools and now taking them to a higher level, then originally in the 1980’s I think it further segregates our school systems, children, and our society. In the blog there is mention of a meeting where parents went against teachers. Why is this happening? Is it because the children aren’t passing the mandated tests? On Thursday, the board placed a policy that allowed the firing of instructors whose students fall short on standardized tests. I think this is terrible that teachers have this pressure of losing their jobs, and students are losing their teachers. And parents are placing blame on the teachers for this when really it isn't their fault. Even these parents spoke in favor of this decision. This upsets me because I think the parents aren't really seeing the big picture. What I really think is great is that 750 teachers were able to come together and stand up for themselves by marching into the school district's headquarters to protest this policy. By these teachers doing this, I see they are transformative teachers who are truly seeking a change in education. Also like it was mentioned in the blog “ this was among the most aggressive efforts in the nation to improve teacher quality." I truly agree, teachers should continue to fight for what they believe in, and strive towards change! (Tara Gleason)

In continuation to what Tara mentions, Deborah's post on Feb 25, 2010, brings up a major issue as far as standardized testing is concerned. This issue is the firing of teachers in which Deborah references The Houston Chronicle from Feb 12: "At a contentious meeting pitting parents against teachers, the Houston school board gave final approval on Thursday to a policy allowing the firing of instructors whose students fall short on standardized tests. Dozens of parents spoke in favor of the decision, while more than 750 teachers packed the school district's headquarters to protest the policy, considered among the most aggressive efforts in the nation to improve teacher quality." Not only does this seem absurd on the efforts from the parents (which I will get to momentarily), but the fact that this district is firing teachers who have these students for 1 year of their career. I do not know the whole situation, but hypothetically, if a 4th-grade teacher is fired because his or her students performed poorly on the tests, do the preschool - 3rd grade teachers who had the same students have the same repercussions? Blame cannot be put on 1 person, or anyone for that matter, for the way in which 20 youngsters perform at a given time throughout the year. It is a collaborative effort between all teachers, parents, administrative, and community. Secondly, I understand parents want the best for their children, but does firing teachers really seem like the answer? If all of these teachers are being fired, who are you going to hire? You will suddenly have all of these new educators, some fresh out of grad school, others experienced teachers, in your school. If these teachers do not meet the ridiculously high benchmarks for the school, are you going to fire them too? Instead of placing all of the blame on teachers, I think parents should look at all of the factors to determine what might help their child, often times, it may be what is going on in their own homes. (Laura Vagnini)

In the "Bridging differences" blog dated February 23, 2010 "The Problem With Charters" Diane is writing to Deborah about the personal gains individuals seek when advocating for charter schools. I had voiced my opinion before about "disaster capitalism" and again in this recent blog we see the effects playing out again. A unifying theme in class has been individuals with a buisness background making decisions in the educational field. The results you get is "no experience running hands on-vocational programs"(Times). I too agree with Diane in her first trust in charter schools when they were first proposed in 1980 "They saw charters as laboratories for public education, places where teachers could try to discover ways to reach unmotivated students. What was learned in charters, they believed, would then be transferred back to the regular public schools, to help them do a better job with the students who were hardest to educate." It is harmful to track kids but in this case if we are providing a more intimate setting and alternative teaching to reach these harder individuals then I am fully supportive of tracking. The New York school had a 50% success rate in placing kids within government supported jobs, if we look at the whole picture that is a great percentage. Compared to after they reformated the school it didn't survive long enough for meaninful data to be collected. On a side note to Tara's post I was just informed and I wanted everyone else to know about the firing of the entire staff at Central Falls High School in Rhode Island [] (Tim Walczak)

In the February 23, 2010 blog written by Diane, "The Problem With Charters", she brings up one particular issue that really stood out to me. They have closed down one of the high schools only to open a charter school. This sounds familiar to what Kozol was writing about in __The Shame of the Nation__. Kozol talks about the different schools that were closed only for new ones to be built in place of them. I feel as though many individuals who are in charge of making the decisions of what to do with the schools feel as though starting from scratch is always better. I do not feel as though that is the case and the charter school reinforces this idea. Here is an example where a school was at about a 50 percent graduation rate where students were able to be certified in a number of different areas gets shut down based upon their graduation rate. A charter school is established and after only 18 months there have been a number of problems. The school cannot even keep teachers or principals. From the way it sounds, this school is actually going to be worse than the original high school that was there. This makes me think of the saying, "If it's not broken, don't fix it". I think the Department of Education should have made changes within the school to make improvements rather than starting from scratch. I think it's frustrating and upsetting for the many individuals who do not have a voice within the education system to see these decisions continuously being made and failing. Our nation is supposed to have one of the best education systems, but I have a difficult time believing that with all of the problems that have been and are continuing to happen. Recently there has been a great deal of negative attention in the media in regards to education. Just the other night on the news was the mentioning of the staff at the high school in Rhode Island loosing their jobs. The political and decision makers of the education system need to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Maybe the problem is not with the teachers, maybe the problem really lies within the system. (Allie French)

Also addressing the February 23rd post, I agree with Allie, Why are we spending all of this money to completely start a new school. Why don't they spend this money trying to fix the school as it was. i do realize that such a drastic change does take time to work. They need to figure out some things and get the teachers and students used to it, but isn't that he same as fixing an existing school. i agree with Diane, I was also for charter schools, but in this case it was replacing an already existing school that was focusing on getting these students jobs. i feel as if it was a way to look better to the parents and administrators that were complaining about the school. If we change it, then everything is solved, clearly this doesn't work. If you can see where the problems lay, then fix what you can in the school. Creating a new building with a new name does not do anything. (Kelly Bates)

The main part of the "Bridging Differences" blog posted on February 25, 2010 that completely struck me was the fact that there was actually a policy approved to fire teachers whose students "fall short on standardized tests". This is further proof of how much teachers alone take the "blame" for students not reaching standardized test scores. Teachers are certainly not the only factor that lends to the students test scores, as there are simple factors that influence these scores just as much, such as parent's involvement or lack of for that matter. As we have discussed in class already, some parents tend to rely on the teachers 100% to have their children up to par and not at risk or failing. Is this really fair? The pressure that teachers face is mind boggling and for something like this sort of policy to be passed just gives society the impression of just how easily we give up on ourselves and the possibility for improvement. Further in this same blog, there is mention of standardized tests having to be good for something other than "competition". It isn't just competition for the student's as a result of what levels they make or don't make, but it is evident that it's rather a competition for teachers, the work force, and so on. The fact that teachers could be fired due to their students not reaching standards only pushes them to further drill these test taking strategies, which in turn takes away the desire that might have been positive at one point; helping and encouraging the student's in every way possible and doing so because you wanted to see them succeed. In my opinion, standardized tests and the issues surrounding them go in one big circle. Chances for improvement are just overlooked and these students are simply passed from one teacher to the next in hopes of a change magically occurring. At this point, what will it take to motivate student's to want to do well for their own good rather than thinking they have to do well in order to be able to succeed in their life? Doing what the 750 teachers did to try and defene their positions is a model for what we need more of as educational leaders. (Mandy Lucente)

In response to the bridging differences entry on February 18th, I completely agree with the fact that teachers are forced to teach to the test. We are forced to teach based on what the students are going to be tested on and not any other relevant information. This is ridiculous. The test should be based on the curriculum not the curriculum based on the test. Another interesting point that was brought up was the fact that students are forever asking, “is this going to be on the test?” Have we trained our students to only learn the information that will be on the test? The point of going to school is to learn, not to just pass tests and get to the next level. But then again, America strives on the system of promotions. The point of being a good worker or student is to be promoted. I guess this just goes back to the ideas of school preparing students for jobs. (Elisabeth dos Santos)

I too agree with the statements made above in this wiki. I feel that it would take more money, time, and effort to completely demolish a school and rebuild a new one in the existing lot. I feel that as a whole we should really focus on fixing up schools and making them student and teacher friendly. Charter schools also sounded like a good idea, but understanding how they work and how students have to pretty much fight to get in is a giant mess in itself. Building new schools and making them look better from the existing one will not solve any problems, but will just be placed in a new school with the existing teachers. I feel that the money spent to build a new school should be used to remodel and incorporate technology to enhance learning of all students. There are endless possibilities to increase a student’s level of engagement in the school, and I am surprised that this technology isn’t being used more wisely. Greg Grochowski

In response to the "Bridging Differences" Blog February 25, 2010 I do not think its right that so much pressure is on teachers for students passing these, "standardize tests". It is because of situations like this why some teachers teach to the test, they are affaid that if their students do not pass these test then they could potentially loose their job. I think that its insane how parents are going against the teachers and even worse "blaming the teachers" for there children not meeting the standardize test scores. Have they ever stopped and considered how much their child is actually learning when they are only being taught to the test? If they want to be taught to take a test then those parents should enroll their children in courses like KAPLAN, whose job is it to teach to the test. I believe that those 750 teachers were very strong individuals in standing up for what they believe in. I think by them protesting it will open the eyes of some resulting in giving students the opportunity to learn a greater amount of material as oppose to learning how to take a test. (Kari M) I read the blog written by Diane on February 9 titled Two Types of Superintendents. In response to to this entry I feel that schools need a balance between the two different types of superintendents (the traditional and the reform). The traditional superintendent believes that they are responsible for the schools and the students in their care and is willing to work hard to solve problems and get the schools to function well. This type of superintendent also believes that they will be judged by their efforts to help the neediest of the students and schools. The other type of superintendent is in a business mindset that focuses on management, organization, budgeting, and data-driven decision-making. The reform superintendent has very little interest in curriculum and instruction and they view the schools that they oversee are like stock portfolio's. As a teacher candidate, I feel that a superintendent needs to be a combination of the two types of superintendents and not all of one and none of the other. I feel that a good superintendent needs to be involved and have the feeling that they are responsible for the schools and the students in their care. I also feel that superintendents need to try hard to solve problems to get the schools to function well. Superintendents also need to be focused on organization, management, and the budgeting of the schools that they oversee. In contrast to the reform superintendent, I feel superintendents need to have interest in curriculum and instruction because that is the most of the paperwork and tasks that go on in schools. I feel that a superintendent that is strongly one of these and none of the other cannot be a fully effective superintendent because both of the types of superintendents have both strong and weak points in their methods. (Jessica Morneault)

I read the blog written by Deb titled, "Divided We Fail," dated on February 25, 2010. Having read this, I've realized that the issue of standardized testing is more of an issue than some of us may think. When I read the part of this blog that said, "At a contentious meeting pitting parents against teachers, the Houston school board gave final approval on Thursday to a policy allowing the firing of instructors whose students fall short on standardized tests," I was shocked. I can't believe that the blame is completely placed on teachers for how students perform on these tests. What good use is it to fire somebody that is //trying// to educate your child and help him or her succeed in their education? Is it fair that teachers are just fired like that for their effort? The blame cannot be placed on teachers completely because didn't anyone think of what and how students' teachers from previous years taught them. Everything learned in elementary school grades helps you for what's to come in the following year, therefore the previous teachers should have also been fired if this is how the problem of poor scores is wished to be solved. The firing of teachers is obviously being done for the children's sake - to help them and do what is best for their future educations. However, I don't think anyone has thought it through that maybe we are hurting children by firing educators across the country. I think we need to start thinking about actions before they are put into play because after hundreds of teachers are fired, do we even know where to go from there? (Danielle Velodota)

The main part of the "Bridging Differences" blog posted on February 25, 2010 that completely struck me was the fact that there was actually a policy approved to fire teachers whose students "fall short on standardized tests".

To me this is being done by administration to get the media and parents off of their backs and onto the backs of the teachers. However we do not really know what is going on at these schools and if the teachers really are terrible but judgeing the teacher's job solely on the students test scores is absolutely ridiculous. There can be so much more going on in these classrooms that people just wont know or understand. Being a teacher is not for everyone. There are coutless obstacles and limitations that teachers face everyday that steer them away from lesson plans and curriculums that the everyday person will not understand. Just because it says in the newspaper and south end high school fell behind in standardized test scoreing doesnt mean that the teacher wasn't doing any and everything they could to get these studeents ready for the test. There are so many factors to list that could have went wrong for the school. And the same goes for the districts who succeeded. These teachers could have been doing bare minimum teaching but could have naturally smart students who would succeed regardless. The teacher at the low reuslt school could have been doing three times the work and effort but couldn't reach her students in that area. Or maybe that school had limited practice material or poor, disruptive learning enviornments. I could go on and on with possible excuses. But we really do not know. To put all of the blame on the teachers abd takeing jobs away is ridiculous. This puts zero responcibility on the parents and students, and 100 % on the teachers. Teachers who now replace these teachers are going to be totally over whelmed about there future of haveing a job and may not be able to focus on their absolute task of being a successful teacher. (Nick C.)

"Bridging Difference" I felt that this blog 2-25-10 was very interesting. Also how standarlized test has affect both the academic and teacehrs all over. How teachers are getting fired because their students are not passing the testing, which i feel is not fair. Some students don't learn as fast as other students, but more importantly, standardized testing is just memorizing. There is no theory method behind it. I felt that the use of books are no longer used often since the students need to focus on these testing. Students seem to learn more and have a better interaction when they work and share with one another. Debra mentioned how in other country such as china whom goals is to beat the intelligence of those in the united states. But there are so much pressure that are placed on teachers now in day about kids/ students passing the standardized testing that it hard, and un fair to place the teachers job in the line if the student does not do well. (frances V)