School Restructures Student Grouping, p. 1
Palmer Park Preparatory Academy, a middle school in the troubled Detroit school system, is being used to test some innovative pilot programs that eventually could be expanded to include other schools in the system. First, it will become a teacher-led school. Four lead teachers are being trained to take on the budgeting and management duties usually done by an administrator. Second, an extended day gives teachers the opportunity every afternoon to engage in “common planning,” in addition to their regular prep periods during the day. They use the common planning time to discuss things such as the results of their lessons, to analyze data from quarterly benchmark assessments, and to decide whether particular students are ready to be moved to another class. Third, they are experimenting with “differentiated instruction” for students, especially for those who have struggled to understand key concepts and who are at risk for falling behind. Schedules are personalized for all students in the pilot program based on data culled from state, local, and classroom tests. Students are placed into one of three classrooms for math and one of three classroom for English/language arts, depending on whether they need more intensive instruction in basic concepts or whether they are ready to move on to more in-depth instruction. Student progress can be monitored on a weekly or even daily basis, and a student can move to another class whenever he/she is ready. Scheduling is based on student needs, not on teacher preferences or convenience.
Differentiated instruction is not a new idea. It is similar to the controversial concepts of “ability grouping" and “tracking.” Critics of these concepts contend that they benefit high achievers but lead to greater educational disparities between them and the low-achieving peers. Anecdotal evidence at this school, however, suggests that students appear to be more engaged and focused on their tasks; some have proactively asked to move on to other classes. Although the program is so new that there is hard evidence to go on, the district will be carefully monitoring progress at the school and accumulating comparative data, including standardized test scores and other measures. If the school shows progress, the district will consider expanding the concept to other schools.
[My thoughts: The innovative approach being tried in this school came about because of a partnership among teachers, the local teachers’ union, the central administration, and a publisher that was hired to revamp the school’s curriculum and which provided the data to drive the differential instruction. It may be difficult to bring together such a coalition in other school districts. I’m not sure that I see the need for teachers to perform administrative roles, but the concept of differential instruction is intriguing to me. It may mean longer hours and a more hectic schedule for teachers, but I see the potential of real benefits for students. I hope that the editors will re-visit the school to see how the experiment has worked once comparative data have become available.]
Renewed Push on ESEA Likely, p. 1
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is being pushed by the Obama administration for renewal. The current version of the law, the No Child Left Behind Act, was passed in late 2001, touted as one of George W. Bush’s singular achievements during his presidency. NCLB is now seen as outdated, however, and a revised version of ESEAwas put forward last year, pushed by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. The revised plan ties teacher evaluations in part to student test scores, gives states more control over how to improve student progress while calling on them to better prepare students for college or for a career, and proposes stringent programs to help those schools that are struggling the most. Some of the administration’s K-12 priorities have already been partially realized through the $100 billion for education in the federal stimulus bill. The $4 billion Race to the Top program, included in the stimulus bill, pushed states to adopt more uniform and rigorous standards, revise their charter school laws, and reconsider teacher tenure and evaluation.
Prospects for the Obama administration’s revised ESEA appear to be uncertain, however. Some of the newly-elected tea party Republicans would prefer to do away with the Department of Education and transfer decision making back to the state and local levels. But Republican leaders share Obama’s concern with teacher quality and would be more inclined to work with the administration on a revised ESEA. The problem has more to do with Democrats in Congress, who are divided over the proposed changes. The NEA, which is usually a reliable ally of the Democratic Party, is highly critical of the administration’s push to link teacher evaluations and tenure decisions to student test scores. A number of Democrats will not want to alienate the teachers unions, although others will want to support the President. It remains to be seen whether they will be able to find common ground.
[Comment: I am reminded of the politician who said, “I am a member of no organized political party. I am a Democrat.”]
No comments:
Post a Comment