How Do You Define "Winning"?

       Expectations play a large part in our perceptions of just about everything.  If you go shopping and expect to pay $75. for good pair of running shoes and find out that they only cost $50. you're happy because it was less than you expected.  If, instead, they cost $125. you're not happy because it was more than you expected.  But what if your expectations were not reasonable?  What if the average cost of good running shoes is $135.?  Compared to this average, it seems like a pretty good deal to get a good pair of running shoes for $125.

       How do you define "winning" when it comes to the education of your child?  What are your expectations?  To what do you compare your child's progress?  Some people look at the comparison of their child's test scores with other students in the class.  In high school, some people look at their child's class rank (which is a comparison of your child with other students in his/her grade).  Other people might look strictly at letter grades.  Are these legitimate measures of comparison?  What if your child always earns the top score in his/her class, but the class is below average when compared to the achieve of all students in the school?  Is your child really "winning" if everyone that he/she is surpassing is below average?

       This competitive nature of ours is misplaced if the goal is to win (or to appear to win) without any concern towards actual learning.  This is why education has standards.  Standards tell us--grade-by-grade--how we are doing compared to where we should be (academically speaking).  When these standards lead to a college-ready status, they tell us that our children are on the path towards being ready for the rigors of college-level work when they are still in middle and high school.

       This comparison is important because too many of our students are graduating from high school being told that they are "winners" because of some lesser standard that they've achieved only to find out that they are not prepared for college.  Less than 50% of students who enter college ever earn a college degree.  If our high school graduation rate was this low, there would be a national outcry from every corner of the country.  But, for some reason, at the college level, this figure is considered acceptable.  Why?

       Our high schools have to be willing to give our students (and their parents) the hard truth about their academic ability.  We should help them as much as we can and we should be compasionate when we give them this news.  But we have to make it clear exactly where they stand when compared to the standards.

       High standards are not an insurmountable barrier.  Most students rise to the challenge when they are pushed to think harder and do more.  If "winning" is important to us, then let's win for real.  Let's push our students to reach their potentials.  They can do it with our help.

We Want Students To FINISH College

       The importance of a college education is well established.  People understand that a college education will increase the likelihood of entering into a satisfying profession and earning a higher income.  Indeed, college enrollment has risen significantly over the past 15 years.  In 2011, 21 million people attended U.S. colleges compared to only 15.9 million in 2001.

       We have won the battle of convincing students of the value of going to college.  But our goal isn't really for more students to "go" to college; our goal should really be for more students to "graduate" from college.  On that metric we are still far from claiming victory.

       Rates vary depending on the source of the information, but overall it is fair to say that merely getting accepted to college is absolutely not a guarantee of graduating from college.  In fact, many colleges have such a terrible graduation rate among students that have been attending for four years that they prefer to publicize their SIX YEAR graduation rate rather than their four year graduation rate.  According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the six-year graduation rate means the percentage of students who are able to complete a four-year program within six years [!] .  Even this extra time only raises the overall college graduation rate to around 50%.


       Can you imagine the outcry from the public, from our government, and from our students if the high school graduation rate was only 50%???  Yet, this fact is not widely known by the public.  Little more than half of our students that begin college actually finish college.  And if you look at the data by race, the news is even worse.

       Of course there are many reasons for why students drop out of college.  A Harvard Study cites the following reasons:
- not being prepared for the rigors of academic work
- inability to cope with the competing demands of study, family, and work
- cost


       Our public schools are in a constant battle with students (and sometimes with parents) over the dueling pressures of Learning versus Getting Good Grades.  Some students care little about actual learning and only want to do what is necessary to earn a good grade.  While their teachers are pushing them to learn, to understand, and to use the learning they've acquired to learn more.  I believe that a major reason for the low college graduation rate is students who do enough in high school to get accepted to college, but don't enough (in high school) to gain the knowledge and the discipline they need to succeed in college.

       We must do better on this front.  We must continue to stress the importance of true learning and true understanding of P-12 content.  We have to lessen the importance of grades and increase the importance of real learning.  In the end, it's not that we want students to attend college; what we really want is for students to graduate from college.

Learning vs. The Appearance of Learning

   

       How do you know if you've learned something?  Think of yourself and your own experiences.  It could be in school or in college or at home or at work or at the beach or anywhere.  Think about something you know and understand very well--how did you learn that?  Think about a time when someone tried to teach you something--like how to wash clothes, or how to fix something, or how to download a file on a computer.  How do you know when you have learned something?  How can you prove that you have learned something?

       Now let's look at our students (and our schools) and the question  becomes, How do we (the educators) know that our students are actually learning?  How can we prove or demonstrate that they have actually learned something?  And does this "proof" really demonstrate learning; or does it merely give the appearance of learning?  

       Do grades accurately measure learning?  Do tests accurately measure learning?  Do performance tasks accurately measure learning?  Can we use multiple such data points to measure true learning?  Maybe we can.  What if schools come up with a system of classwork and homework and written tests and verbal tests and formative tests and performance tasks and standardized tests; and we put all of the information from these multiple sources into a "bowl" and mix all of these multiple results together and then we make a determination of the level of learning attained by each student?  Since students demonstrate true knowledge and understanding in different ways, this method would allow each student to demonstrate what they know and are able to do.

       Of course, I am describing exactly the method that our public schools use to help us to make these determinations of learning.  Often, sadly, the end result of this process is a single letter grade.  So the challenge is, Does this single letter grade accurately describe the student's ability?  When it does, we have succeeded in communicating real learning; when it doesn't we have only communicated the appearance of learning.

       So the next question is: Who cares if the "B" or the "A" represents real learning or the appearance of learning.  If a child receives the same rewards (such as college admittance), then it doesn't matter if the learning was real or perceived.  The difference is, real learning is lasting and real learning can lead to future learning that builds on previous learning.  The mere appearance of learning is fleeting.  Eventually the student will reach a point where he or she will no longer be able to keep up the appearance of learning.

       This occurs in our students' P-12 schooling experience as they move up in the grades.  So often we hear parents say that they child did so well in school in earlier grades and was unable to continue to do well in later grades.  Of course, there are many reasons for this to occur, but one of these reasons is the issue of actual learning vs the appearance of learning.  This is a particular problem for over 50% of students that go to college.  They get accepted to a college and they cannot complete their degree program (sometimes they cannot complete their first full year of college) because their P-12 grades gave them and their parents only the appearance that they were learning.

       As a country, we can argue (and we do) over the purpose and validity of testing and grades and homework and course content and so many other aspects of our P-12 experience.  I believe that such arguments are generally good for the democratic purpose and I hope that such well-meaning arguments lead to better schools.  However, I would contend that such arguments should focus on helping our students to truly learn and attain knowledge.  When we (for instance) argue against a particular test because we fear that it will expose that our students are not as able as we want to think that they are, I would suggest that that is the wrong reason for refusing such a test.  

       As hard as it can be for some of us, we have to be honest with ourselves and with our children.  The goal shouldn't be to "win" at all costs.  The goal should be to learn.  School shouldn't be a competition against each other.  School should be about learning--and only about learning.

Are the new PARCC and Smarter Balanced Tests Too Difficult?

       Public schools across the country are now using the new PARCC and Smarter Balanced assessments in Mathematics and English/Language Arts in grades 3 to high school.  Aside from the political commentary about these tests, some teachers have concerns that they are too difficult for their students.  Along with this concern comes concerns about hurting students' self-esteem, battling parents' perceptions of their children's abilities, and aligning earned course grades with earned PARCC and Smarter Balanced scores.

       I have heard and read comments that say that these tests are good for students who are very strong academically, but that they are inappropriate for students who are average or below average.  Sometimes parents have commented on sample problems and have stated that they are too hard for the students.

       The standards that these tests are written to are aligned to world-class education standards.  I realize that "world-class" is a buzz word, but I agree that these standards (and associated tests) represent an uptick with regard to rigor compared to those that they are replacing.  We know that too many of our students get good grades in elementary and middle school and then struggle with subjects in high school.  Or, they do fine (in terms of course grades) even through high school, but then they do poorly on the SAT or ACT.  We also know that many students graduate from high school, go to college, and do not graduate from college. (see college graduation rates)

       Hence, public schools are faced with this problem of students who appear to be learning and doing well in school, but then struggle with learning later.  We addressed this problem by incorporating tougher standards and putting in place assessments to see if the students are attaining these tougher standards.  In my opinion, this needs to happen; this must happen.  Nobody wants to see their own child struggling.    But we have to realize that this is already happening:

• poor SAT/ACT scores
• low AP scores
• high percentages of students taking remedial math and english courses in college
• students dropping out of college before earning a degree

       Until now, we have always been able to say "my kid gets good grades in school, so none of these other things matter to me".  But we have been fooling ourselves.  

       If we want students to be successful, we have to raise the standards (as we've done) and we have to insist on continually high standards throughout P-12 education.  This must happen.  Better education leads to better lives for our future adults--which leads to a better society for all of us.

       The tests are not too difficult.  We must, must, must insist on high standards, and we must do everything we can to help our students to achieve these higher standards.  I believe that our public schools will do exactly this in the years to come.  We will meet this challenge and we will raise student achievement and we will help to produce a society of educated people who are not afraid to face challenges, find solution, and succeed.

Everyone Should Go to Community College

       The Community College system in the United States is simply the perfect college option for many of our high school graduates in my opinion.  

       Here are some of my reasons for this statement:

1. Close to home.
2. Less expensive.
3. Small classes.

       Let's start with my first reason: Close to home.  I went to a college that had the initials TSC.  (This college has since been renamed.)  Among the students at this college, we referred to "TSC" as meaning "The Suitcase College" because just about everyone went home on the weekends.  I remember thinking at the time that high school students are always complaining about "living under the rules of their parents".  They want to be on their own; they want their freedom.  And, so, I thought that these people were hypocrites when, given the opportunity, would rush back home at every chance they got to do so.

       Of course, it probably isn't fair to categorize young people this way.  It is more likely that they rushed back home to be with their friends.  It is also likely that they really didn't hate their parents as much as they said.  According to the Higher Education Research Institute (and referenced here), 53% of college students attend a school within 100 miles of their home and 90% within 500 miles.  This tells me that most students want to attend college close (or relatively close) to their home.  Surely lower in-state tuition is part of the reason, but I think another reason is that newly graduated high school students are not completely ready to break all ties with their hometown by attending a college that is very far away.

       Community colleges provide the college experience with college courses and college teachers while still remaining close (sometimes very close) to home.  Students don't have to adjust to a new environment--perhaps with new foods and new expressions and maybe new fashions and (perhaps) a new climate--in addition to the (sometimes shocking) new experience of college-level course work.  Change is hard and a lot of change at once can be too hard for some students to endure.  The closeness of community colleges allows students to be close to friends and family and familiar settings, while they adjust to some aspects of college life.

       Reason number two: Less Expensive.  Full discloser; I am the cheapest cheapskate you will ever meet.  If I see something for free, I take two.  So my views of cost are probably skewed when compared to those of normal people.  However, I would think that lots of middle-class, working class, and (certainly) poor people are interested in finding good deals wherever they can be found.  And when you are talking about cost, Community Colleges are a very good deal.

       Tuition costs at community colleges are not merely "less" than those of public and private four-year schools; they are dramatically less--50% less; maybe even 75% less.  And students take the same courses and earn the same credit that they would at the much more expensive four-year schools.  To put a dollar figure to it, according to the College Board (reference found here)  the average cost of tuition and fees at a two-year school is only $3,131 which is just over one-third (60+% savings) of the cost for a year at a four-year institution.

       And here is a sobering statistic that we don't like to talk about, but when it comes to cost this is important.  Only slightly more than 50% of students who enter college eventually earn a degree.  Most people know someone who began college and then left college after one semester or after one year.  Imagine paying $25,000. or $35,000. and then your child drops out of college.  Isn't it better to risk only $3,131 to see if your child is college-ready?  For thirty thousand dollars you could have bought your child a car and rent for a year--during which time he/she could have been looking for job.

       Check out this recent study on the issue of college dropouts.

       Finally my third reason: Small classes.

       I have to be honest here; I'm not completely sure that community colleges can promise small classes or smaller classes that at four-year colleges.  I did find this reference and this one that mention community colleges having smaller classes.  But, to be fair, these references don't cite research.  I know that people often talk about large lecture halls at big, four-year colleges.  If it is true, then the "large lecture hall" is (yet) another major transition that students need to make when they begin college.  Most high schools keep classes to 30 students or less; maybe 35 or 40 would be the biggest class that any high school student would typically experience.  

       

       Smaller classes don't make students smarter, but they do open the possibility that the teacher would have better relationships with his/her students.  When students and teachers get to know each other, than students tend to do better in classes.  This is the factor that helps small class sizes to lead to better academic performance by students.

       The transition to college is a major life transition for 17 and 18 year old people.  Many new things are happening all at once.  A typical student might be able to handle some of these changes, but still struggle to handle all of these changes.

       Community Colleges help students to manage these multiple changes by being close to home, having much lower costs, and having small classes (similar to high school classes).  They also have all sorts of academic supports to help students to succeed.  Community Colleges are a great deal.  I think everyone interested in earning a BA or MA should consider Community College as a starting point.

We Must Do Better - Part 2

       This post is part two of a three-part series titled We Must Do Better.

       I love public schools; and there is a lot to cheer about when it comes to the ability of public schools to prepare students for their futures.  But there are three major areas in which public schools must improve if we want to see ourselves as providing a world-class education to our nation's children.

       1) We must raise the achievement of poor children.

       2) We must increase graduation rates.

       3) We must provide continuous, high-quality professional development to our teachers.

       It isn't that there aren't other areas that can and should improve in our public schools.  But improvement in these three areas are absolutely critical if we truly want our school system to be exceptional and of the highest quality for all of our students.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We Must Do Better

Part 2 - Increasing Graduation Rates

       Part 1 of this series was about the need to increase achievement among poor students.  I am going to begin this part by looking at the differences in high school graduation rates between poor students and non-poor students.  Take a look at this graphic from the organization America's Promise Alliance:

       This graphic shows that (in 2012) low-income students had a graduation rate below 80 percent in 41 states while non-low income students had a graduation rate below 80 percent in only 7 states.  As a nation, our graduation rate in 2012 was 81 percent.  (source: National Center for Education Statistics - The Condition of Education)  

       Our national graduation rate has been rising since the 1995 - 1996 school year when it was 71%. We are moving in the right direction as a nation, but we still have a long way to go.  Allowing 1 of every 5 students to leave school without a diploma has real and serious consequences.  These include:

• Higher unemployment rates
• Lower pay compared to people with high school diplomas
• Greater need for public assistance
• Greater chance of incarceration
• Less effective parenting skills

(sources: here and here and here)

       Public schools clearly have many responsibilities.  We must do everything we possibly can to get more students to graduate from high school--especially poor students.  In decades past, completing high school was arguably less important than it is today.  However, in today's world and in the world that our students will inherit, people without a high school diploma have a greatly enhanced risk of lifelong struggles to avoid poverty and to experience a middle-class lifestyle.

     As a graduate student, I questioned the difference between students who dropout of high school and students who graduate in the bottom 10% of their class.  I hypothesized that such students who barely graduate were no better off than students who didn't graduate.  Using data from the National Center for Education Statistics, I discovered that weak high school graduates were still better off than high school dropouts.  That's right; even students who struggle to pass all of their courses in high school and eventually graduate are better off than people who never earn a high school diploma.  Why?  I think it is because there is something within these weak students that says, "This (schoolwork) is hard, and everyday I come to school I know that I am going to struggle.  But I am going to continue to come and to work and to finish high school."  I believe that students who (perhaps) hate school and always struggle academically AND still graduate have had a life experience that they carry with them in their futures struggles.

       This message of the importance of graduating from high school is logical and sensible to everyone working in education and probably to just about everyone outside of education.  But despite our best efforts, this message is not getting through to 19% of our youth.  And it is hitting particular groups of students worse than others.  Once again, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (see top of page 13):

Group                  Graduation Rate (2012)
Amer. Indian/
Alaskan Native                68%

Hispanic                           76%

Black                                68%

Poor students              well below the national average (see America's Promise)

     These focus areas will help to improve graduation rates among our most vulnerable groups of students:

1. Adress chronic absenteeism
2. Improve middle schools
3. Re-engage youth who have left school
4. Provide more and better adult and peer supports

       We must do better at raising the high school graduation rates of our students.  It is important to our nation; it is important to every young man and woman in our high schools.

Summertime (and school)

     Once we get into the month of May, students and teachers start to think about summertime.  Warm weather, schools out, vacation, camp.  Everyone says, "I can't believe the school year has gone by so fast."  Seniors graduate, elementary students "graduate" to middle school--a very big deal--, final exams, sign my yearbook, tears, and joy.

     For teachers, summertime can be a time of relaxation, gardening, swimming, sleeping late, and forgetting what day of the week it is.  However, for teachers, summertime is also the time for doing many professional activities that help them to improve and to advance in their field.

     Teachers take classes to increase their knowledge of teaching strategies and to learn more about the teaching of their subject.  Teachers also take classes to work toward future degrees and certifications.  Teachers may take part in curriculum work during the summer with their school district.  This may include writing assessments, creating activities, aligning new resources to the current curriculum, and moving electronic resources to district websites for teachers to access.

     Aside from these formal, professional activities, teachers also use summertime to think about and to plan for the next school year.  They look at new resources; they may plan the first one or two units of study.  They read blogs and books and journals to gain ideas for the next year.

     Teachers are busy during the summer.  They relax, but they are always thinking about their students and thinking about making their lessons interesting.