Articles in the Curriculum category

Evolving approach to teaching evolution, undermines scientific rigor

science-laboratory-work_w523_h725It’s a tad disturbing when science teachers don’t teach science.

Yet, according to a survey of 926 high school biology teachers, that’s exactly what’s happening. Most survey respondents admitted they’re not doing a good job teaching evolution.

The findings, published by two Penn State University professors in the January 28 issue of Science magazine, reveal that 13 percent of biology teachers admit they “explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light.”

Another 60 percent of teachers skirt the controversial issue and are “neither strong advocates for evolutionary biology nor explicit endorsers of nonscientific alternatives.”

So what should school board members make of this? Well, for one, suggest Penn State professors Michael Berkman and Eric Plutzar, if teachers give any weight to theories without a strong scientific foundation, “this approach tells students that well-established concepts can be debated in the same way we debate personal opinions.”
(more…)

Naomi Dillon|February 10th, 2011|Categories: Curriculum, Educational Research, Governance, Leading Source, Teachers|Tags: , |

The week in blogs

Ask an 8-year-old this Sunday what he wants to be when he grows up and you might hear “a star running back for the Green Bay Packers” (or the Pittsburgh Steelers). Or maybe, if he or she is more focused on the halftime show: “A rock star like the Black Eyed Peas!”

How would you respond? Probably something on the order of, “Aww, isn’t that cute.”

But get the same response from, say, a 13-year-old – and I did once, when I visited an alternative school in Brockton, Mass., and talked to a 5-foot, 98-poundish student who wanted to be a pro basketball player — and your reaction would be more like:  ”Isn’t that sad and deluded.”

Truth is, schools need to do a better job of preparing students for careers as well as higher education. And this week the Harvard Graduate School of Education released a report outlining just how it thinks it should be done.

One big supporter is Education Secretary Arne Duncan.

“I start with the basic premise that it is the responsibility of K-12 educators to prepare all students for both college and a career,” Duncan said in a speech this week.  ”This must be ‘both/and,’ not ‘either/or.’ High school graduates themselves – not the educational system – should be choosing the postsecondary and career paths they want to pursue.”

A great idea, but what’s the track record for schools in preparing students for careers? A mixed one, notes Education Week‘s Catherine Gewertz in the Curriculum Matters blog.

What’s another way to improve career education – and, indeed, all education? “Stop driving out good teachers,” says University of Georgia Professor Peter Smagorinsky, quoted on the Atlanta Journal-Constitution‘s Get Schooled blog.  In this witty and quite opinionated piece, Smagorinsky muses about how today’s test-crazy education leaders would have reacted to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount Speech.  Hint: Think multiple choice.

“I suspect that neither (here he’s referring to Jesus and Socrates) would last long as the test-administering functionary required by Duncan.”

I think “Ouch” is the proper (and clichéd) response.

Finally, thank Alexander Russo’s “This Week in Education” for alerting us to the return of Patrick Riccard’s satirical “Edu-Pundit” on YouTube. Very clever. Very funny … but scarily close to reality? See for yourself.

Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Lawrence Hardy|February 4th, 2011|Categories: Assessment, Curriculum, Dropout Prevention, Educational Research, Governance, Leading Source, Policy Formation, Student Achievement, Teachers, Urban Schools|

The week in blogs

High School Soup had great things to say today about NCES’s new Education Dashboard, a database that looks at how students in the states and nation rank against a number of key academic benchmarks. In fact, the blog says, the new resource shows ”the Obama Administration gets it…”

All the indicators on the dashboard are connected in some way to the Administration’s signature goal of making the U.S. once again the leader in college degree attainment.  

Now, a critique: National stats are great – and a tremendous help to reporters like me – but sometimes these relentless counts and comparisons seem to focus on ends (some of them of dubious value, such as the number of states using student achievement data in teacher performance evaluations) at the expense of substance.

To which, none other than Ronald Reagan might have replied – as he did in one of his famous presidential debates _– “There you go again!” Only this time, the one saying that is Alexander Russo, taking so-called education “progressives” to task for being much better at knocking popular school reforms (the Harlem Children Zone, the educational changes in places like New York and Chicago – or, I might add, the new Education Dashboard) without coming up with better ideas of their own.

So, yes, we’ve still got a long way to go in the way of developing 21st-century skills. As one national daily put it, “Educators are hardly triumphant and say different skills are needed to compete in a global knowledge economy.”

So true. Except the above quote comes not from a U.S. newspaper but from the state-controlled China Daily, which, according to Atlantic blogger James Fallows, isn’t overwhelmed by the fact that Shanghai teenagers are outscoring the rest of the world in reading and math, and says they need to do more critical thinking and less rote learning.  

Finally, let me recommend Joanne Jacobs’ blog on the rise in “blended learning” at the K12 level, a combination of traditional and online classes that looks like a wave of the future.

 Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Lawrence Hardy|January 28th, 2011|Categories: Assessment, Curriculum, Educational Technology, Governance, Leading Source, Policy Formation, Student Achievement, Teachers|

Are we dumbing down college?

1-1251554604ir6KEducation will not be the biggest issue in tonight’s State of the Union Address. That distinction will go to the economy. But if President Obama is looking to elicit some bipartisan support, he might want to reiterate a comment he made in a speech last August about the need to increase the rate of college attendance and graduation.   

“We know that in the coming decades, a person’s success in life will depend more and more … on a higher education,” Obama said.

With members of Congress scattered about the chamber – so there’s camaraderie in seating, if not necessarily politics – everyone’s going to be looking for that feel-good moment when they can all stand up and applaud. And what better way than for Obama to restate his pledge that the United States will once again be Number 1 in college graduation percentage by 2020?

But just how good is that college education he’s promoting?  Two recent New York Times forums – “Too Much Free Time on Campus?” and “Does College Make You Smarter?” – address those issues and reveal some disturbing research and commentary. For example, Philip Babcock, of the University of California, Riverside, says his research shows “a whopping 10-hour decline” in studying among full-time, four-year college students between 1961 and 2000.

Babcock says this phenomenon is partly the result of colleges’ need to market themselves to prospective students.

“One college even sent out Frisbees and chocolate chip cookies in its recruitment package,” he wrote. “The message couldn’t be clearer: Come to our college. It’s a vacation spa. It’s Club Med.

Having not been to Club Med, I cannot offer an informed analysis of that statement. However, colleges aren’t the only one’s being criticized. Leon Botstein, the president of Bard College, takes high schools to task as well. Having interviewed Botstein a few times, I’ve found his comments to be sometimes, well, a little over the top; but he makes some good points and his critiques still need to be taken seriously. This is what he had to say:

“Why is anyone surprised to find that standards and expectations in our college are too low? High school graduates — rapidly dwindling elite — come to college entirely unaccustomed to close reading, habits of disciplined analysis, skills in writing reasoned arguments and a basic grasp of the conduct, method and purposes of science.”

Don’t think we’ll be hearing that at the State of the Union speech tonight.

 Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Lawrence Hardy|January 25th, 2011|Categories: Curriculum, Educational Research, Governance, Leading Source, Policy Formation, Student Achievement|

The week in blogs

My 9-year-old showed me her book report last night; I read it and made this comment:   

“You need to say ‘on which’ here, not simply ‘which.’ And if you’re turning this in tomorrow, your pencil needs to be sharper.”

“It’s a first draft,” my wife said. And, no, it’s not due tomorrow. And one more thing: “Why are you being so tough on her?”

Why? Is it because I’ve just read about Amy Chua, the now-famous “Tiger Mother,” and fear her kids are getting ahead? (Metaphorically speaking – I believe they’re teenagers now.)

Forgive me for belaboring Chua’s recent Wall Street Journal article and the myriad responses it’s received. But there are two reasons why I find this discussion fascinating. One, of course, has to do with comparing the different styles of so-called “American” and “Chinese” parents.  My book report critique notwithstanding – I tend toward the lenient side.

(more…)

Lawrence Hardy|January 21st, 2011|Categories: Assessment, Budgeting, Curriculum, Dropout Prevention, Educational Research, Governance, Leading Source, Student Achievement|

NSBA staff show how school boards can prepare for common standards

In a span of less than two years, 40 states have signed on to an effort to adopt common standards in math and language arts — a development that will have big implications for how those subjects are taught and assessed in local school districts.

But while school boards have mainly sat on the sidelines as governors and state legislatures signed on the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, this is no time to “wait for the states,” said Roberta Stanley, director of Federal Affairs for NSBA, and Patte Barth, director of the organization’s Center for Public Education.

“This is a state-driven initiative, but there are things you can do now,” Barth said during a Jan. 19 webinar for NSBA’s National Afiliate program. “You know what your needs are at the local level.”

Some of the things school districts should do are: get involved in the discussion of state standards with their state education agencies; set aside time for school boards to review CCSS and its implications; and form discussion groups on the subject involving parents, teachers, and administrators.

School districts can also survey local businesses for their input and reach out to their communities in other ways, Barth and Stanley said. And they should partner with local colleges and universities to work on professional development, curriculum alignment, and placement tests that some colleges are giving high school juniors to determine if they are on track to do college-level work when they graduate.

Led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, the initiative aims, in the words of its creators, devise “fewer, clearer, [and] higher” standards that will enable all high school students to succeed in postsecondary education and the workplace and help America compete in the growing global economy.

“It’s an exciting time,” Bill Scott, executive director of the Kentucky School Boards Association, said recently. “But it’s also producing a lot of anxiety.”

A study released in December by ACT found that just 38 percent of 11th graders scored at the college-and-career level benchmarks in 2009. Writing and language ability were somewhat better, with 51 percent and 53 percent, respectively, meeting those standards.

The language arts levels were lower for African Americans and Latinos. For example, just 11 percent of African-American 11th graders and 19 percent of Latino 11th graders met the reading threshold.

In both math and language arts, the standards ask students to do more analysis and critical thinking than currently required by many state tests. Barth pointed to a language arts example that required eighth graders to read Robert Frost’s poem “The Road Not Taken” and then analyze how the poem’s opening stanza structures its rhythm and meter, and how the speaker’s themes develop over the course of the text.

“We’re taking material we’ve already taught eighth graders, and we’re ratcheting it up.” Barth said.

In addition, Barth said, CCSS includes new standards for reading and writing in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. These standards are expected to compliment current content standards in these subjects. Teachers of these subjects will be responsible for seeing that their students meet them.

According to a recent report from the Center on Education Policy, most states say they will not be able to fully implement the standards until 2013 or later. Still, many observers say the time frame is relatively short for such a far-reaching initiative.

During the Race to the Top competition, officials from the Department of Education strongly encouraged states to adopt the standards, Stanley said, but only 11 states and the District of Columbia were awarded RTTT grants.

Stanley said the common core initiative is occurring in tandem with efforts to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). She said Department of Education officials are expected support tying ESEA program funding to adoption of CCSS — something NSBA opposes, saying its support has been contingent on the standards remaining voluntary for states.

Other challenges for states will be implementing technology-driven assessment systems at a time when state and district budgets are being cut, Stanley said. She said more resources will be needed to support any new technology.

“We know the frustration local districts have in terms of the technology Washington, D.C, expects you to have,” Stanley said.

Lawrence Hardy|January 21st, 2011|Categories: Curriculum, National Standards, School Board News|

The week in blogs

Many years ago, when I was a college senior in Southern California, I took a child development class connected with a wonderful campus preschool that was all the things you would expect a ‘70s-era preschool to be – discovery oriented, child centered, creative, and fun.  It guess you could call it “open classroom” as well,  seeing as the kids had the run of a multi-room former home; of course it helped, in terms of classroom control, that – in addition to having a wonderful director – there was a ratio of roughly one college student helper for every two children.

Flip ahead two years, and I was one of the teachers in a Head Start program for minority students in Boston’s South End. This was also “open classroom,” but by necessity: There was some structural problem in one classroom that forced us to combined two classrooms of 20-some students each into a mega-class of four teachers and more than 40-something children.

Yes, it was bedlam. There were just too many students – and too much noise – for much real learning to occur.

I thought about those two schools this week after reading about an experimental elementary school in Brooklyn founded by a former principal and Harvard graduate student who was trying to replicate the small discussion groups at Phillips Exeter Academy. This is analogous to my California school. But, according to a New York Times story on the project and Joanne Jacobs’ subsequent blog, instead of organizing several small groups (which may not have been possible) the founder put 60 first graders in a class with four teachers, and the results were …. yes, as the Times strongly implies, bedlam. The same thing I experienced in Boston.
(more…)

Lawrence Hardy|January 15th, 2011|Categories: Assessment, Curriculum, Diversity, Educational Research, Educational Technology, Governance, Leading Source, Policy Formation, School Buildings, School Climate, Student Achievement, Teachers, Urban Schools|

The week in blogs

A widely cited 1998 study linking childhood vaccines with autism wasn’t just bad science, a British scientific journal says: It was fraud.

That bombshell was released last week as investigative reporter Brian Deer revealed the results of seven years of work into the research behind the notorious Lancet article written by Dr. Andrew Wakefield (and several other authors who later took their names off the piece).

Read about the report in the British Medical Journal and at National Public Radio’s website. Then look at the March 2008 article by ASBJ Associate Editor Joetta Sack-Min about the enormous expense that educating children with autism is placing on some school districts.

Our next item isn’t about K-12 schooling per se, but with college football so prominent this time of year, we thought it appropriate to include a piece by Maureen Downy of “Get Schooled” about those amazing Auburn Tigers, which, are playing Oregon for the BSC National Championship at the Fiesta Bowl Monday night.

Well, maybe not so amazing when it comes to their academic prowess. According to a recent New York Times report, Auburn dropped from No. 4 in the NCAA’s Academic Progress Rate, a four-year analysis of team member’s progress toward graduation, to No. 85. That was four years after a Times investigation found an unusual number of football players taking what the university calls “directed-reading courses” – that is, independent study.  In fact, one sociology professor was reported to have “taught” 252 independent studies courses (“10 would be considered ambitious,” the article said) during the team’s undefeated 2004 season.

Another sociology professor who discovered the abuse said Auburn’s precipitous fall in the NCAA academic ranking was actually a good thing. “A genuine consequence to this has been that the people who want to do things right have gotten a bit more grasp of what the university is trying to do,” said the professor, Jim Gundlach.

So high school graduates, want to go to a great university like Auburn – and we mean really go? Better load up on those AP classes.

“Load up on AP classes.” Is there something wrong with that line? Critics in a New York Times forum on the tremendous group in Advanced Placement say there is. Just listen to high school English teacher Patrick Walsh:

“In the last 10 years, Advanced Placement has become a game of labels and numbers, a public relations ploy used by school officials who are dumping as many students as they can into A.P. courses to create the illusion that they are raising overall standards and closing the gap between whites and minorities,” Welsh writes.

Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Lawrence Hardy|January 7th, 2011|Categories: Budgeting, Curriculum, Educational Research, Governance, Leading Source, Policy Formation, Student Achievement, Wellness|

Report finds states enthusiastic for common core standards, but implementation takes time

States competing for federal Race to the Top money may have been pushed by the Obama administration to sign on to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, but more of those that did based their decision on the standards’ promise of increased academic rigor than on gaining an edge in RTTT competition.

That’s one finding of a report released Thursday by the Center on Education Policy, which surveyed state deputy superintendents or their designees in 42 states and the District of Columbia. So far, 41 states have adopted the standards in mathematics and language arts, which were released last year as part of an effort by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers to better prepare high school graduates for college and the workplace.

Thirty-six states said the rigor of CCSS was “very important or important” in their decision to adopt the standards and that the standards “could serve as a foundation for statewide education improvement.” Thirty percent said the possible effect on the state’s success in RTTT was a very important or important factor.

The survey also found that many states will not be able to fully implement the standards until at least 2013. For example, of the 31 states that will require (rather than simply encourage) districts to implement the CCSS, just seven expect this measure to be implemented by 2012. The rest say it won’t happen until 2013 or later.

Jack Jennings, CEO of the Center for Education Policy, said adoption of the standards is just one part of a long and complex process.

“Common standards are the first step,” Jennings said. “Common assessments are the second step. This is just the front end of re-envisioning education” before the critical implementation stage.

Two state consortiums are developing assessment systems to align with the core standards: the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium.  While it is not yet clear which elements of either consortium’s work will be included in the final document, leaders of both consortiums agree on one thing: with a deadline of 2014, there is much work to be done in a relatively short amount of time.

One district that is not waiting for the federal assessments to be finalized is the Boone County Schools in Florence, Ky. The Bluegrass State was the first to formally approve the common core standards, and Boone County is one of the first districts in the nation to design resources for teachers that will specifically explain how the standards will be applied and assessed at each grade level. The effort is district wide for this school system of 20,000 students, with teachers, principals and staff participating from each of its 23 campuses

“You can’t just give teachers a set of standards and expect them to teach them every day” without providing more specific curricular support, said Karen Cheser, the district’s assistant superintendent for Learning Support Services.

NSBA’s National Affiliate program will offer a webinar on how districts can prepare for the common core standards that will feature staff from the Center for Public Education and advocacy department. The event will take place Jan. 19 from noon to 1 p.m. EST and is free to all National Affiliates and state school boards associations. For more information or to register, go to Web Channel NA.

Lawrence Hardy|January 7th, 2011|Categories: Curriculum, Federal Programs, National Standards, School Board News, School Boards|

Teaching the Constitution

As the U.S. House of Representatives reads the Constitution today, BoardBuzz wanted to share with you some great resources to teach students about our Constitution:

Alexis Rice|January 6th, 2011|Categories: Boardbuzz, Curriculum, Student Achievement, Teachers|
Page 5 of 24« First...«34567»1020...Last »