Author Archive for Robert Pondiscio

Curriculum vs. 21st Century Skills

Dan Willingham’s latest is up at the Britannica Blog, and it’s a keeper.  The UVA cognitive scientist and Core Knowledge trustee looks at several recent reports on “21st Century Skills” including creativity, critical thinking, global awareness, and information literacy, and asks “Where’s the beef?” 

21st-century skills require deep understanding of subject matter, a fact that these reports acknowledge, albeit briefly. As I have emphasized elsewhere, gaining a deep understanding is, not surprisingly, hard. Shallow understanding requires knowing some facts. Deep understanding requires knowing the facts AND knowing how they fit together, seeing the whole. It’s simply harder. And skills like “analysis” and “critical thinking” are tied to content; you analyze history differently than you analyze literature, a point I’ve emphasized here. If you don’t think that most of our students are gaining very deep knowledge of core subjects—and you shouldn’t—then there is not much point in calling for more emphasis on analysis and critical thinking unless you take the content problem seriously. You can’t have one without the other.

Calls to focus on 21st-century skills, Willingham concludes, evoke a familiar pattern:  pendulum swings between an emphasis on process (analysis, critical thinking, cooperative learning) followed by a back-to-basics movement that emphasizes content. “In calmer moments,” Willingham writes, “everyone agrees that students must have both content knowledge and practice in using it, but one or the other tends to get lost as the emphasis sweeps to the other extreme.”

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Michelle Rhee Is Scaring Me

I have never met Michelle Rhee.  Like many people in education, I’ve seen her speak on panels and at conferences, and I’ve read about her extensively.  And let me say clearly, immediately and unambiguously that I support most of what she stands for.  Furthermore, I am in absolute agreement that a profound lack of patience is the only reasonable response to a failed and sclerotic urban school system.  I get it. 

Michelle Rhee is starting to make me nervous.  I don’t mean giddy-excited nervous, but wincing, “uh-oh” nervous.  With her appearance on the cover of Time Magazine this week, she’s now officially the face of education reform in the U.S.

That face is wearing a scowl.  America, say goodbye to Wendy “One Day, All Children” Kopp.  Meet Michelle “I don’t give a crap” Rhee.  Education reformers, say hello to your new cover girl:

In many private encounters with officials, bureaucrats and even fundraisers–who have committed millions of dollars to help her reform the schools–she doesn’t smile or nod or do any of the things most people do to put others at ease. She reads her BlackBerry when people talk to her. I have seen her walk out of small meetings held for her benefit without a word of explanation. She says things most superintendents would not. “The thing that kills me about education is that it’s so touchy-feely,” she tells me one afternoon in her office. Then she raises her chin and does what I come to recognize as her standard imitation of people she doesn’t respect. Sometimes she uses this voice to imitate teachers; other times, politicians or parents. Never students. “People say, ‘Well, you know, test scores don’t take into account creativity and the love of learning,’” she says with a drippy, grating voice, lowering her eyelids halfway. Then she snaps back to herself. “I’m like, ‘You know what? I don’t give a crap.’ Don’t get me wrong. Creativity is good and whatever. But if the children don’t know how to read, I don’t care how creative you are. You’re not doing your job.”

Saying ”the thing that kills me about education is that it’s so touchy-feely” is kind of like saying, ”The thing that kills me about accountancy is that it’s so detail-oriented.”  I’m as data-driven as the next guy, but education is now and always will be — must be — a people-driven enterprise.  People are the product.  The desire to successfully develop the capabilities of others is what gets teachers out of bed in the morning.   

Even people who work for her seem to agree.  By coincidence, the Washington Post’s Jay Mathews has a piece in today’s paper about Brian Betts, Rhee’s hand-picked principal of Shaw Middle School at Garnet-Patterson.  And Jay has him sounding downright touchy-feely. 

Students and parents told Betts that many teachers they knew at Shaw and Garnet-Patterson didn’t care about them. “Nothing that I have ever seen trumps personal relationships at this level,” Betts said. “The kids in this building who can be absolutely horrible in one person’s class can be angelic in another because they have formed a relationship with that teacher.”

Full disclosure:  I worked at Time Magazine long enough to know that a taste for “thesis journalism” is practically stamped on newsmagazines’ genetic code.  Maybe that’s what’s happening here.  The reporter decides the direction she’s taking the story, and piles on the quotes and anecdotes to paint the picture of Michelle Rhee, hard-charging, no excuses type.  See Rhee scowling at a teacher; see Rhee walking out of a meeting punching text into her Blackberry without so much as a “good day.”  She’s on a mission, dammit, and niceties aren’t on the agenda!  Even the cover — especially the cover — See Michelle Rhee with a broom!  She’s the new broom!

Here’s what worries me: accurate or inaccurate, fair or unfair, the increasingly confrontational, impatient, blunt, even rude public persona that’s affixing itself to the Washington, DC schools chancellor runs the risk of getting in the way of what Michelle Rhee wants to accomplish.   I’ll put it bluntly: piss off enough people whose help is essential to your success, and your failure becomes inevitable, a consummation devoutly to be wished.  Then for years to come, the answer to the reforms anyone proposes becomes, “Oh yes, we tried that in Washington under Michelle Rhee and you remember how that worked out.” If she fails, Michelle Rhee’s failure will not be hers alone.  At worst, she runs the risk of damaging the ed reform “brand” for a generation. 

The bottom line:  Most people want to see Michelle Rhee succeed.  But some would like nothing more than to see her go down in flames.  It’s important not to upset that balance and add boxcar numbers of people (you know, people and whatever) to the those who are already sharpening long knives.  That’s not being touchy-feely.  It’s being pragmatic.  A lot of other people’s dreams, plans and hard work are riding with Michelle Rhee on that broom.  And it’s a long way down.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Behold The Writeulator!

What if there was a writeulator? wonders Paul, a public school math teacher who blogs at When Galaxies Collide.  Arguing against the widespread use of calculators in math class, he imagines what would happen to a student’s writing skills if there was an ELA version of a calculator.

To use it, you simply type in four sentence fragments; one for character development, one for causality, another for conflict, and the last for a bit of complication. Then you plug the device into a computer through its little port and push the writeulate button. Voila! On the computer you get a complete short story. All the nasty spelling, sentence structure, plot, and paragraph development is done for you by the writulator and the output is delivered nicely wrapped in Microsoft Word.  Far fetched? Sure! But, think for a moment what such a device would do for your writing skills. Even more frighteningly, think of what it would do for your ability to even speak a coherent sentence.

A writeulator would disrupt the connection between a thought and its alphabet, just as calculators disconnect numbers from mathematical reasoning.  ”Fluency with multiplication facts makes you fluent in factors,” Paul writes. ”Factors make you fluent in division. And so it goes, on and on through the magnificent and ancient hierarchy of mathematics. Every such trip, strenghens your lower level skills and builds insights that are cut short by a calculator.”

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Required Reading

A weekly roundup of the week’s most important news, information and blog posts about curriculum, teaching, education policy and other items of interest to the Core Knowledge community.

Core Knowledge

What It Takes
You can’t ask kids to do “self-directed” writing about their family, their friends and their personal experiences throughout elementary school to the exclusion of nearly all else, then expect them to dazzle you with their insights into literature in middle school simply because you “raised expectations.”

Before 21st-century skills, teach basics
The Boston Globe
Massachusetts’ 21st Century Skills Task Force recommendations seem so reasonable at first glance: “Evolve” curriculum to include skills students will need to succeed in a rapidly changing world.  “But what those skills have in common,” write Charles Chieppo and Jim Stergios of the Pioneer Institute, “is that being proficient at each requires knowledge of the liberal arts.”

The Adult Literacy Paradox
Millions of children struggle to attain a functional level of literacy, but where does the reading problem go when children grow up?  Overwhelmingly–but not always accurately–adults rate their own reading skills very highly. 

Best of the Blogs

The Calculator Conundrum at Making Education Public
Proponents of calculator use, argue that computational fluency is not essential to higher level math. They observe that higher level math is abstract, symbolic, and largely computation free. What they miss in this argument is distressingly plain to see. Abstraction only works when one knows what is being abstracted.

Flunking the Electoral College at Joanne Jacobs
Seventy-one percent of adults failed a civic (and economic) literacy test, according to Our Fading Heritage by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.

Un-Transition at Edspresso
A look at President-elect Obama’s education transition team members is telling, worries the blog of the Center for Education Reform. “They come from the traditional, Kozol-esque education perspective that relies on well-intentioned government programs and court decisions to force schools to do good, rather than accountability and power in the hands of educators and parents to create good.”

Teaching and Curriculum

Students shortchanged in math teaching
Associated Press
Poor and minority students are about twice as likely to have math teachers who don’t know their subject, according to a report by the Education Trust, a children’s advocacy group.  The complete Ed Trust report is available here.

‘Intimidating’ boys put girls off science, minister says
The Independent
Britain’s new Schools minister advocates a return to single-sex education to get girls more interested in subjects like science and engineering.

Parents clash over kindergarten Thanksgiving costumes
The Los Angeles Times
For decades, Claremont kindergartners have celebrated Thanksgiving by dressing up as pilgrims and Native Americans and sharing a feast.  Parents are sharply divided over whether these construction-paper symbols represent a child’s depiction of the traditional tale of two factions setting aside their differences, or a cartoonish stereotype.

Education Policy

Show-And-Tell Time
Newsweek
The education community is badly split on the issue of how to hold teachers accountable. The establishment sees tenure as teachers’ only guard against politics and arbitrary firings. Reformers regard it as the chief obstacle to change. Obama has given mixed signals on accountability, and in his way, he has convinced each side that he agrees with them.

Schools deserve bailout, too
The Miami Herald
As banks, cities and the auto industry apply to the federal government for a bailout, the Miami-Dade schools chief Alberto Carvalho says Congress shouldn’t forget the nation’s public schools.

The true school scandal
The Los Angeles Times
The Obamas will send their two daughters to the expensive private school, Sidwell Friends. “Yes, that makes him something of a hypocrite,” writes Jonah Goldberg.  “But you know what? Who cares?  The scandal is that politicians tolerate such awful schools at all. For anyone.”

Support for magnet schools waning despite their success
The Los Angeles Times
The programs have frequently achieved their goal of voluntary integration and high-quality academic programs. But funding is stagnating, partly due to nation’s budget woes.

Homeschooling and Parenting

A New Face for A.D.H.D., and a Debate
The New York Times
The emergence of a major celebrity with attention deficit, Olympic star Michael Phelps, has revealed a schism in the community of patients, parents, doctors and educators who deal with the disorder. For years, these people have debated whether it means a lifetime of limitations or whether it can sometimes be a good thing.

Homeschoolers call for ABC boycott
Associated Content
Joy Behar, on ABC’s The View, remarked that “a lot” of homeschoolers are “demented.” This has many homeschoolers on the defense and even going as far as to call for a boycott of ABC programming.

Michelle Obama’s ‘Mommy’ Stamp
Washington Post
When Michelle Obama took to describing her new role as mom in chief, columnist Ruth Marcus winced. “What does it say about the condition of modern women that Michelle Obama, catapulted by her husband’s election into the ranks of the most prominent, sounds so strangely retro.  More Jackie Kennedy than Hillary Clinton?”

Et Alia

Children Who Live in Public Housing Suffer in School, Study Says
New York Times
New York City children who live in public housing perform worse in school than students who live in other types of housing, according to a study by New York University researchers.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Science for Girls

England’s new Schools Minister thinks single-sex science classes would get more girls to choose careers in science and engineering.  “Girls do much better in science in single-sex classes. Sarah McCarthy-Fry tells The Independent.  ”They sometimes feel intimidated in mixed-sex classes with the boys hogging the limelight and putting their hands up to answer all the questions.” Mrs Tuck said more people were aware girls learnt differently from boys due to “neurological differences” in the developments of their brains.

“Oh Jeebus, what now? High School Musical-branded Bunsen burners?” groans one wag over at the blog Liberal Conspiracy. “The idea of making the sciences more ‘girl-friendly’ in order to attract more women is not only a crock of s— but, if followed through as a policy objective, yet another nail in the coffin of science education in the UK.”

A slightly more measured take can be found over at Richard Whitmire’s blog, Why Boys Fail.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

The Adult Literacy Paradox

It’s a given that as a nation, millions of children struggle to attain a functional level of literacy, but Tom Sticht of EducationNews.org wants to know, where does the reading problem go when children grow up?  Overwhelmingly–but not always accurately–adults rate their own reading skills very highly.  When broken out by ethnic groups, Sticht notes, the ratings are

Whites: Very Well-77%, Well-21%, or Not Well/Not At All-3%.
Blacks: Very Well-67%, Well-27% and Not Well/Not At All-6%.
Hispanics: Very Well-46%, Well-22% and Not Well/Not At All-32%

Just because adults think they read well, however, doesn’t mean they do.  When the average proficiencies of whites and blacks on the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) prose scale were compared, Sticht notes, the average proficiency of whites who rated themselves as reading very well was 308, well above average.  Blacks rating themselves as reading very well scored 259, well below average.  What’s going on here?  Sticht has a theory:

Perhaps when children grow up and get out of the pre-K-12 world they adapt to the ambient literacy demands of a cultural niche that they find possible to occupy. They find jobs they can qualify for, they get information from sources they have access to and feel comfortable in using, and as they slip ever more firmly into their literacy niche, they feel more and more satisfaction with their literacy skills. Maybe this is why so many U.S. adults think they read Well or Very Well, despite their poor performance on literacy tests.

If they are using themselves as a standard, Sticht concludes ominously, many adults are not able to judge whether or not their children are learning to read well in school and fail to act accordingly.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Envelope Culture

In Vietnam, parents who want teachers to pay more attention to their children pay extra money to kindergarten teachers monthly.  And when parents don’t abide by the unwritten rules of this “envelope culture,” kids can suffer.

“Hoang Thi Yen in district 8, HCM City, said she has to give VND200,000 [about 12 U.S. dollars] a month to both of her daughter’s two teachers for a ‘present’” VietNamNet reports.  “Yen said that all the parents she knows also give extra money to teachers. Yen is afraid that the teachers will not take care of her child if she doesn’t do this.”

Another parent reports that when she picks up her daughter from school and is not given a warm welcome, she understands that it’s time to give an envelope to the teachers. “Teachers change their attitude towards me and my child if I’m slow in giving money.”  Two months ago, says this parent, she was having difficulty persuading her son to go to kindergarten. Her son said he did not want to go to class. However, after she gave envelopes to teachers, her son all of a sudden liked going to school. “The teachers’ attitudes make me feel that they just want money, while they don’t care for children,” she said.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Follow Me

Who will govern a free nation if no one understands the mechanics and instruments of that freedom?  Maybe, one day, a demagogue, writes columnist Kathleen Parker in The Baltimore Sun.  That’s her bright and cheery conclusion after reviewing a poll that shows “only 27 percent of elected officeholders in the survey could identify a right or freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment. Forty-three percent didn’t know what the Electoral College does. And 46 percent didn’t know that the Constitution gives Congress power to declare war.”

In his book Just How Stupid Are We?, historian Rick Shenkman, founder of George Mason University’s History News Network, is tough on everyday Americans. Why, he asks, do we value polls when clearly The People don’t know enough to make a reasoned judgment?  The founding fathers, Mr. Shenkman points out, weren’t so enamored of The People, whom they distrusted. Hence a republic, not a democracy. They understood that an ignorant electorate was susceptible to emotional manipulation and feared the tyranny of the masses.

OK, American’s lack of civic knowledge is low-hanging fruit when you need an evergreen column on a holiday weekend.  But Parker has more than half a point.  In tough economic times and a dangerous world, the potential to lead an uneducated country in any number of unsavory directions will always be a danger.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

What It Takes

Over at Eduwonk, Andy Rotherham posts a pair slides of 7th-grade writing assignments from two different middle schools in California, culled from a presentation by Ed Trust.  In the first, students are asked to submit a detailed character analysis of Anne Frank; the second asks students to write about “my best friend” or “a chore I hate.” The point is stark and obvious.  ”When you hear people talk about the expectations gap, this is the sort of thing they are talking about,” Rotherham writes. 

Would that it were so simple as “raising expectations.”  In the comments section, the smart and fiery John Thompson, an occasional contributor to this blog, describes a disappointing exercise at his Oklahoma City high school similar to the one posted by Eduwonk, and gets to the heart of the empty slogan that is “high expectations.” 

Had it been done as a wake-up call, and a first step towards raising standards, it would have been constructive. Had they asked why some teachers wrongly lowered standards too much, making class dull, it would have been a great professional development tool. Had they addressed the extreme classroom disruptions in neighborhood 7th grade classes that make it virtually impossible to do more than busywork, it would have been a contructive excercise….But our district leaders had the the same visceral response as you seem to be having, and mandated immediate and much much higher standards. Instantly, many core teachers were intimidated into teaching five years above the students reading level, and failure rates soared to 95% in some. The dropout rate exploded and the distrcit immediately abandoned the experiment.

“The reality is so shameful, when administrators/lobbyists with no relevant experience in the classroom come in contact with it, they have no idea how complex the problem is,” writes Thompson. ”Then when the consultants offer the simple and free solution of just “raise expectations,” the blame and shame game takes over, and the students are hurt even more.”

In my own comments on Eduwonk, I point out that curriculum is an undiscussed piece of the “high expectations” dodge.  To John’s point, students don’t just show up in middle school five years behind their higher-achieving peers.  You can’t feed kids a thin gruel of content-free, “self-directed” reading and writing for their entire academic career and then expect them to suddenly be able to write a nuanced character study of Anne Frank in the 7th grade.  You can’t ask kids to do “self-directed” writing about their family, their friends and their personal experiences throughout elementary school to the exclusion of nearly all else, then expect them to dazzle you with their insights into literature in middle school. 

The policy community, alas, continues to be nearly silent on curriculum, focusing instead on incentives, “teacher quality,” and other structual issues.  Read Eduwonk’s post and the responses.  May I humbly submit that the time has long since come to a) start looking at what students are actually being taught and, b) listening to teachers?

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Election Winners and Losers

If you favor school choice and charters, then Kentucky, Oklahoma and Tennessee get the highest marks for “improvements shown” based on the results of this month’s state and federal elections, according to the Washington, DC-based Center for Education Reform.  In Ohio and Wisconsin, things have taken the biggest turn for the worse, based on a state-by-state analysis on CER’s website. 

While it’s still too early to assess completely how recent election results will affect the rise (or fall) of a broad array of school choice programs,” notes CER founder and president Jeanne Allen. “A few states did have significant changes that might provide a glimpse of what is to come.”

In Kentucky, one of ten states without a charter school law, “a bi-partisan coalition of reformers with strong support from minority communities stands ready to propose educational choice,” says Allen.  Oklahoma, meanwhile, has a “weak and ineffective charter law” that has actually been under attack.  “But with the legislature now squarely in the hands of reform-friendly Republicans and a new superintendent race in two years, which may be won by the parent activist who first brought charters to the Sooner State, we anticipate much activity to grow opportunity for kids,” she writes. 

Finally, we are so thrilled that the planets seem to have aligned in Tennessee where the leadership knows and appreciates the need for in-depth changes to that state’s charter law, stymied by onerous requirements that prevent most kids from being able to avail themselves of better schools outside of a few pockets of hope.

In Ohio and Wisconsin, on the other hand, CER thinks shifts to Democratic rule in state Houses of Representatives “will send the champions of choice in these two states into the minority.  These two states have Governors who have pushed to obliterate the path-breaking choices that children in those states enjoy – and are the only two that offer both charters and more ecumenical choices through vouchers.”

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]