So, the snarky side of me wanted to name this post: “Another Bob bites the dust,” not because I was going to smack him down or anything, but because I was in a snarky mood when I read his comment, this post title sprung to mind, and I have been unable to shake it from my head since it planted its seed. But see, in the spirit of the holiday season, I went with a more benign post heading, but I digress before I have even had a chance to get started.
I wanted to make a quick (okay, maybe not so quick) response to Another Bob’s comment on why charters were so compelling, although the question I had asked was why was the proposed charter so compelling. And by proposed charter I specifically meant the K-5 portion of the ACLC/NCLC/Nea/whathaveyou charter school. So, Another Bob wants his kid to try something that will eventually “fit” for his/her style of learning. Based on his experience having moved place to place he liked the experience of trying out new educational experiences.
Ancedotal story ahead, you’ve been warned…
I also was a child who moved around a lot when I was growing up throughout my entire elementary school experience. From Missouri to Kansas to California, I had been in no less than five different schools from K-6, so I was exposed to a number of different teaching styles to which I had to adapt to, which is very difficult for a child in addition to being in a new school trying to make friends, etc… Not to mention being the only Asian kid in the non-Calfornia schools, but that’s another baggage for another day. I had always been farther ahead than the majority of kids in my reading. The solution in Missouri and Kansas was to send me to the next grade level for reading. The solution in my first California school was to use those SRA reading materials, I ended up completing the entire box even though I had started school mid year. The solution in my second California school was to have me individually work with the teacher in the accelerated reading class. This lead to me being bored most of the time when I finished early.
Of all those solutions, the ones that worked the best were those that did not isolate me from the other students. What always worked better for me to “reach my potential” was to throw in a good healthy amount of competition. When you have a nemesis or nemeses that you are trying to best academically, it does a lot for your grade point average. Which is why a program like the literacy one at Chipman is preferable over just throwing a kid in front of a box of color coded reading materials and accompanying question and answer sheet. From the Berkeley School of Journalism’s North Gate News Online, there is a great story about the successes of the Chipman literacy program that does not get measured in test scores:
…Inside Chipman, there is a strong sense of community among students and faculty alike. And those who have worked with the school, including outside consultants, praise the ability of teachers and administrators to collaborate.
On paper, though, the school’s image is not so rosy. Chipman was under a state-mandated monitoring program for two years and is on probation under the federal No Child Left Behind Act because of low test scores.
But in an ongoing effort to improve literacy, the school is using a three-tiered program designed by Chipman teachers that has boosted student reading. The program combines an old method of dividing students by ability, but employs new curriculum to help them move to the next level.
…
When students enter Chipman, they are assessed for literacy and are placed into the three types of classes — Reach for the lowest, strategic for those just below grade level and benchmark for those at or above grade level. Regardless of which level students are placed in, all classes are rigorous and fast-paced. Students are assessed every six weeks and can be moved up if they show improvement.
In the Reach classes, lessons are about the mechanics of reading. Classes start with students chanting a row of words aloud along with the vowel sounds used.
…
Inside a strategic class, students read novels. The focus is on honing techniques such as using prior knowledge, looking for clues to decipher unfamiliar vocabulary or making predictions.
…
Students at a seventh-grade benchmark class, where the focus is on social sciences, say that they are definitely challenged by the assignments. There are difficult words to learn as well as projects that put words into a larger context.
…
Today, Chipman is leading the way for Alameda Unified School District to take part in a new program with the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning called Fusion, which boosts reading comprehension and is designed to bring students from the basic reading level to proficient or advanced. The program is being used only in one other city in the country.
As a result, Chipman is getting more recognition for its reading accomplishments outside Alameda than inside, where people only pay attention to test scores, said former Principal Laurie McLachlan-Fry…
To be continued…
The school I went to for Elementary school was an experimental Magnet school. Even though the school was located in an extremely rural area, we had a fairly robust mixture of children from a variety of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. African American, Latino, and Asian American kids were in all my classes. As a child, I was exposed very early on to a wide spectrum of different cultures. All this happened in an area that isn’t ’supposed’ to be as racially harmonious as say-Calfornia, NY, and other places put on a pedestal as the mixing pots of America.
Whats more is that this was a regular public school in the public school system. I just happened to be zoned within its boundary.
I think this just comes to prove that for some of you who think you must only live in California or “the other coast” in order to expose your children to culture and so fort might need to take the blinders off. There are programs nation-wide that offer some terrific programs and do so without the severe competition, budget shortfalls, and lack of facilities.
Comment by edvard — December 27, 2007 @ 7:57 am
From KU’s Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) of which Fusion Reading is one of many strategies.
“Anecdotal data strongly indicate that students who master several SIM-based strategies become good citizens within the classroom and school. Because they are finally being successful in school, they evidence fewer inappropriate behaviors and set meaningful goals relative to performing successfully in school and in post-secondary settings. Most importantly, as students become better learners, their confidence and willingness to work hard in a purposeful way increases”.
In my view, any strategy that aims towards these goals and comes close to the target is worth trying.
Comment by Jack Richard — December 27, 2007 @ 9:31 am
During the summer, 90 teachers from all the middle school and high schools participated in SIM training. AUSD is partnering with Kansas University in attempt to bring SIM into an entire school district.
http://www.mikemcmahon.info/simtraining.htm
Comment by Mike McMahon — December 27, 2007 @ 9:55 am
I agree with you Jack #3 if it occurs in AUSD, but if that technique is employed by NCLC I wouldn’t use that as a justification for their existence.
I was in elementary when SRA was introduced. It was great for the better readers who tore through them and continued to feel good about themselves, but did little to enhance the skills of other kids like myself who struggled. For me it just high lighted competition, which fed the fat heads of some of my classmates who were motivated by gloating about how smart they thought they were. (By the way, the arguments about competition being healthy for our schools is a convoluted red herring, but a topic for another discussion)
In retrospect, my progress and my classmates progress largely hinged on the attention we got at home in the way of parental in put. It’s hard for a school to compensate for poor parenting, but we have to try to serve all comers. With new language learners perhaps we will have to wait a generation to get really good results. This is America, land of immigrants.
Most parents who are hot for charters are activists parents who are very involved with their kid’s learning, so you expect these kids to test well. The school gets too much credit for the test results.
The stats on ACLC in terms of drop out rate of the children “of color” are damning. It may be easier to help those kids at risk at the K-5 stage (”before they are tainted”), but I don’t think the NCLC proposal is convincing enough that the board should be expected to approve it under the existing state rules.
The proliferation of charters could get to be like termite infestation.
Comment by Mark I — December 27, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
By the way, I was not implying that Lauren was a fat head because competition worked for her.
anecdotal digression: In my class, the very kid who was the fastest reader was also the fastest runner and best athlete. Veritable golden boy. In the sixties there seemed to be much less emphasis on fair play and sportsmanship, regardless of any lip service.
After enduring a fair amount of taunting on the sports fields in the standard sports it was a revelation and sweet revenge to get this kid out on a pond in ice skates and watch him fall on his ass and even through the ice. My rage as an adult is wired directly to that kid and others like him.
Philadelphia was not a city of “Brotherly Love” by the time I came along, despite the original Quaker influence. It’s currently the city of fratricide.
Comment by Mark I — December 27, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
Re 4 & 5
Lauren’s and your experience with SRA aside, I think the KU SIM strategy makes sense. From a practical standpoint the SIM may be better suited for regular public schools since these are the schools that are expected to brightly burnish some pretty scuffed apples. The Fusion Project would seem to fit better in that environment than in what’s described as an already dynamic Charter school environment.
Going a little further with your “charter schools like termite infestation” analogy, won’t happen in Alameda. MA saved old Alameda structures from their natural demise (termite or otherwise), I suspect AUSD will survive in the same manner. Maybe we can add AUSD to the “N” list of Historical Significant Structures and lobby to have it included on the National Register of Historical Thoughts thereby qualifying for the nine thousand-eight-hundred and FIRST line-item earmark in the next federal budget money bill.
One last thing Mark I, you wrote; “By the way, I was not implying that Lauren was a fat head because competition worked for her”…. If that’s what you weren’t implying, then what is it you did think caused her fat head?
Comment by Jack Richard — December 27, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Too many smiley faces.
Comment by Lauren Do — December 27, 2007 @ 5:18 pm
As the district Reform Coordinator for the Strategic Instruction Model (SIM), I would like to clarify a few points. SIM in the simplest form can be seen as having two components. 1. Stategies and 2. Content Enhancement Routines. Strategies are the explicit teaching of the skills that strong students use (consciously or unconsciously). Content Enhancement Routines are for regular content classrooms from grade level courses through AP courses. These are tools that are used so that teachers can organize and prioritize what they, how they present the material. In addition, there are tools that students use to take notes, organize their ideas and master critical concepts.
FUSION is a set of the SIM Strategies that are being taught in a very systematic way by a group of teachers who have recieved extensive training and are participating in monthly coaching. FUSION is for students wh are within two years of grade level in reading as measured by a number of assessments including but not limited to decoding, fluency and comprehension. This reading class is being provided in all three middle schools and all three high schools in Alameda. The truth is, there are low readers at all secondary schools in all towns.
If ACLC does not have the struggling readers (this is what determines test scores) and everyone else does, one must assume that they have found the holy grail of education or they don’t keep students who can’t read well enough to be academically successful. If they have found the “magic”, share the knowledge as the entire country is looking for some soultions for this epidemic.
In addition to FUSION, all middle and high schools in Alameda (non-charter) have teachers who have been training with Content Enhancement Routines and are being coached monthly. There are over 90 teachers in AUSD who have been trained and many who are becoming masterful enough to begin training others. When you walk into a great teachers classroom who is using either FUSION or Content Enhancement well, the learning is powerful and the teaching is an art. I am completely awed by what I have been priveledged to see in some classrooms.
Chipman is doing an amazing job. If you look at the test scores of the students by demographic, Chipman’s scores are in line with other sites in the district. If you look at how the students in the advanced Reading classes are doing, they are just as strong as their “academic peers” at the other two middle schools. If you actually take the time to go and visit the classrooms at the school, you will see amazing classrooms that are safe, welcoming, inclusive and being led by teachers who are professional and model what it means to be life long learners.
If you go to visit classrooms at Encinal, you will see much of the same. You will also see students from ACLC taking courses that are not available at their Charter. What you won’t see is that although the courses are being taken from Encinal teachers, the students test scores go back to ACLC.
It should also be acknowledged that there are teachers at Island High and Alameda High who are also doing amazing work with SIM.
Charter schools can’t guarentee great teachers any more than regular public school, they can really only guarentee a homogenous population and that does not mean great education. Great education is when you have great teachers and AUSD has many!
Comment by Sylvia Kahn — December 28, 2007 @ 12:47 am
Jack,
About fat heads, it’s takes one to know one don’t it?
Anyway, we expect self esteem should be enhanced by excelling in any skill, but if a person needs to lord that over the less accomplished to feel good about themselves, that is a flaw.
In sports there are usually distinct winners and losers by definition of how we play the games. This is a venue where we seem to have the most problem with some folks getting a little too serious about the winning part.
Reading is perhaps THE most basic fundamental element of education. It is a solitary activity and generally speaking imparting that skill isn’t well served by an environment of competition.
Comment by Mark I — December 28, 2007 @ 11:51 am
It’s funny to see comments concerning specialized, ‘gifted’ programs for those who excel in school. I was never considered gifted, got just ok grades, and received a 4.0 average.For some reason, the thoughts of jealousy never crossed my mind.In my mind, they were simply “The smart kids”.
Ironically, I wound up succeeding later in life more so than the bulk of those gifted students. Many of those kids didn’t succeed because even though they were book smart, they lacked common sense. Of those who lacked common sense, I found that most did so because their parents protected and insulated them. In other words, they were never given the opportunity to apply what they had learned to real world problems.On the other hand, my parents instilled a sense of realism on me in the form of getting a job and managing my assets by the age of 15.Just as I’ve mentioned before, I have my parents to thank for the bulk of my ‘education’.
In my opinion, not only should parents be a part of their child’s educations, but they should also expose their kids to real world situations. Make them get jobs. Save up for their college, or at least part of it.When it comes time to rent a place, have them be responsible for the costs.
These days I see so many parents who give everything to their kids on a golden platter. In fact, go to any number of stores, malls, fast food eateries, or so forth and tell me how many teenagers working there. None. Zero. They’re all getting pocket money from Mom and Dad.For those kids their parents are doing them no favor.
Education in the form of school, programs, and books can only go so far. Education also means preparing future citizens for what lies out there. If kids in school feel angered over the prospects of a few smartypants kids being elevated above them, then so be it. That’s life which in of itself is full of disappointment and competition. The sooner kids are made aware of the world outside the classroom doors, the better prepared they will be to apply their knowledge.
Comment by edvard — December 28, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
#10 “If kids in school feel angered over the prospects of a few smartypants kids being elevated above them, then so be it.” By this I hope you don’t mean the charter schools elevating already privileged kids.
In terms of being kids being angered by students with swollen heads, i.e. conceited achievers, the world IS full of disappointment and competition, but there are the schools of academic learning and the school of hard knocks. I’d like to see an attempt to maintain the school of academic learning as a relatively safe environment for kids to experiment and get up to speed with mastering skills, without being distracted by ego trips and excessive emphasis on competition.
Admission to the school of hard knocks is easier for some than others, but all classes of individuals take some courses there sooner or later. If one feels they have graduated, there are endless post graduate opportunities. I hear Professor Murphy teaches a zinger of a law course.
Comment by Mark I — December 28, 2007 @ 7:57 pm
# 11 Professor Murphy also teaches a zinger of a course on how to keep life’s hard knocks, competition, ego trips, swollen heads, smarty pants kids, conceited achievers out of the schools of academic learning…with amazing results
Comment by Jack Richard — December 29, 2007 @ 10:15 am
Jack #12 maybe you should clarify, your meaning is not self evident.
It seems to me the whole charter manifestation is one huge lesson in Professor Murphy’s class for those of us trying to keep the mainstream public system tracked and making some forward progress.
Rich kids and other fortunates may start life cutting class at s.o.h.k., but using the Kennedy’s as one extreme example, there is always time to graduate.
Comment by Mark I — December 29, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
As Sylvia Kahn (who is incidentally my daughter, a graduate of Chipman ,Encinal and UC Berkeley) has indicated, there are teachers throughout the district who are outstanding educators, innovative teachers, educational leaders in their schools.
As person who has been active in school affairs for over 40 years, I have seen this district change, always too gradually for activists like myself, but for the most part, moving forward and without the mistakes made by districts which chased grants and political whims .
For the record–I am part of a group of 6-8 women (we ate brown bag lunches on a weekly basis to strategize ways to improve education, hence our name the Brown Baggers) who were advocates for and worked for an elected, rather than an appointed school board, libraries in every school, volunteered on district committees and in classrooms, and elected two of our members to the school board.
There has always been an undercurrent of racism in the attitudes of people toward the schools in Alameda, including giving false addresses to avoid certain schools . I see nothing in this proposal that moves against this bigotry, and in fact supports it.
Comment by Barbara Kahn — December 29, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
What is the current demographic composition of Alameda’s charter schools? How does this compare with overall district averages?
What is the demographic composition of each school grade? What is it for the charter schools?
Comment by Alameda NayTiff — December 30, 2007 @ 9:11 am
# 13 Okay Mark I, I’ll explain.
In your # 11, this is what you wrote, “In terms of being kids being angered by students with swollen heads, i.e. conceited achievers, the world IS full of disappointment and competition, but there are the schools of academic learning and the school of hard knocks. I’d like to see an attempt to maintain the school of academic learning as a relatively safe environment for kids to experiment and get up to speed with mastering skills, without being distracted by ego trips and excessive emphasis on competition.”
Based on the above, I’m thinking that you’d like to see a school of your dreams. You may not know it but Professor Murphy has taken a Law School sabbatical and is now teaching courses on how to keep life’s hard knocks, competition, ego trips, swollen heads, smarty pants kids, conceited achievers out of the dream schools of academic learning…with no entrance or completion competition. And just like his law courses, the results are amazing.
You say give that school a chance, what could go wrong?
Comment by Jack Richard — December 30, 2007 @ 10:44 am
was aquamarine the last SRA color in the box:;-)
Comment by another bob — December 30, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
Re # 14
Why is it bigotry for parents to try to get their children into the best school their tax dollars pay for?
Comment by Jack Richard — December 30, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
Jack,
I’m still totally lost on #16 but don’t waste more time on me.
Comment by Mark I — December 30, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
RE #18
Why is it wrong for parents who pay in those same dollars (or more) to want them to stay in the system for which they were intended and fight some bizzare way around private school vouchers…
I have so many friends who have kids at private schools yet support every tax for the schools and school events. They understand that they have chosen a program that is different than the one provided by their tax dollars and are paying to have that service.
By the way Jack, if you murder someone you don’t get to pick a police department that doesn’t arrest people for that. You chose to live here and you knew what the school system is like.
Comment by Barbara M — December 30, 2007 @ 6:37 pm
# 19
Mark I, Murphy’s law stipulates that regardless how much you want your dream school to succeed (your dream school is, as you stated in #11, one of academic achievement separate from the school of hard knocks), the most likely outcome will be that it will become the school of hard knocks.
Comment by Jack Richard — December 30, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Re # 20
Barbara M. Your first line…Is it a question?
“Why is it wrong for parents who pay in those same dollars (or more) to want them to stay in the system for which they were intended and fight some bizzare way around private school vouchers…”
I’m not sure I understand the meaning of your words. Were they in response to my question in # 18?
In response to your second paragraph. I admire your “so many friends” who are trying to do the best for their kids.
The third paragraph murder-arrest-school-choice analogy perplexes me. Are you implying that just because someone lives in Alameda they must place their children in Alameda schools?
Comment by Jack Richard — December 30, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
It is bigotry/racism/classism, etc. when the school is only good because the test scores represent what white kids from educated homes can do, regardless of what school they attend and the parents blindly assume it is because the “facilitators” in this case are up to some sort of extra special teaching that is nothing more than homogenous grouping. If you don’t want your kids to go to school with a heterogenous population, go to private school.
Comment by Sylvia Kahn — December 30, 2007 @ 11:08 pm
[...] a number of different discussion boards (Check out the Alameda Schools Connection) and blog posts (LD’s at the top of her form, with solid discussions following the [...]
Pingback by My Girl Likes To Charter All The Time « Stop, Drop and Roll — January 2, 2008 @ 8:42 am