What Morph?

SATURDAY, AUGUST 20, 2011


Dearest readers, if you made it through "Why Morph?" you may be thinking, "So, we need to change. But change what?" Ah, the "What Morph?" question. Glad you asked!

There are things we cannot change, at least not at this point in our science. We cannot change the DNA or IQ or ethnicity of our kids. Some kids do a great job of choosing their parents, others not so much. And, we cannot change the DNA or IQ or ethnicity of the parents either. We continue to see high outcomes as measured by standardized tests in the zip codes with the same DNA, IQ and ethnicities of most of us in the school system, and we continue to see low outcomes in the zip codes where kids did a terrible job of picking their parents. We do not get to choose, design, place an order for, or import the children of America; and the parents in each community send us the very best kids they have. We take what we get, each child precious and flawed, each parent or guardian precious and flawed, and each and every one of us in the system precious and flawed. We cannot change that. (Well, OK, I do know folks who have migrated to the posh zip codes for safety, wealth and easy pick'ns of high performing kids. But most of us deal on a daily basis with kids whose best time in the day is at school.) We can change how we respond to all of the above. And not with another silver bullet program.

Apparently, we cannot change the notion on the part of most folks that schools should be run like a business and teachers and principals should be judged on the quality of the product, i.e., standardized test scores. We know better, and we keep trying, but, it just doesn't fit public education.

So, we can start changing the things we have some control of and we can do it each and every day via our attitudes and expectations, and our ability to get to the polls and vote.

(Before I begin seriously suggesting transformational changes, I would like to toss out just a few for fun. Would one of the billionaires who currently throws money at schools to implement their educational theories please throw some money into two simple research topics. The first one I would test is the answer to the question, "Can schools make kids fat?" My hypothesis is that schools are unable to impact the body mass index of students based on the meals we serve. The second one is, is there a homogeneous, wealthy school system of all Anglo kids who are poor performers on standardized tests? My hypothesis is no such school exists. The results of these two topics alone could transform what we do in lunch rooms and classrooms across the country.)

#1. First thing I'd change is to end compulsory attendance. Yep. The research that shows charter schools and private schools outperforming public schools is basically a wash, and where it appears that those schools do actually outperform public schools is not because parents have choice, but because parents know that if the kids mess up or perform poorly, he or she gets his or her little butt kicked out of the school where they had to audition to get in. Instant parent support! OK, let's give public schools the same tool. If this country really believes in public education, and really believes that every single child should get a high school diploma and be prepared to enter college, then let's set up a system where parents, business, law enforcement, community leaders, and billionaires have some skin in the game other than their annual tax bill. Eliminate compulsory attendance. Kids who actually show up are there because their parents want them there or they want to be there and all will profoundly recognize that public education is a gift, an honor, a privilege. (OK, we know that a great many young children miss school because of their parents, not because the kid wants to miss school. So, when we wipe compulsory attendance off the books, we add perks for going to school beyond the intrinsic value of getting an education. Want welfare? Kids must be in school. Want a driver's license? Kids must be in school. Want a tax exemption for dependent children? Kids must be in school. But, the school no longer has to take them in and keep them.) We eliminate the drop-out rate as a statistic used to beat up schools. We fund schools based on enrollment, not attendance. We do all that and we will dramatically change the culture of the school, the parents, the kids, and the country. Now, rather than public school bashing, parents will be eager to support and enforce the efforts of their kids. Private sector motivators do not work well in school, but clearly a host of folks think they work well outside of school. So, let attending school be the motivator not the punishment!

#2. Second thing I'd change is the structure of the school day. We organize schools in the way adults have deconstructed knowledge, not in the ways kids actually learn. No one outside of school faces 90 minutes of English Language Arts followed by 30 minutes of exercise. Reality comes at us in a rush, and in any given hour I need math skills, reading comprehension, history, physical ability, a solid sense of the sciences, problem solving abilities, conflict resolution skills, information processing skills, and probably most of all, interpersonal people skills. Life is a lab and a field trip all rolled into one, not a sojourn once each nine weeks. Students regardless of age should float from large group to small group to individual instruction based on the student's needs and interests.

#3. Third thing I'd change is the school year. Until teachers work a regular work year they will continue to be attacked. OK, let's make teaching a "real" job with real salaries and real benefits and work year round.

#4. Fourth thing I'd change is the staffing plan of schools. Our mental image of kids in a rectangular room on a hallway with one certified adult in the room in no way matches the reality and the future we are theoretically preparing our kids to enter. Professionals collaborate, they do not isolate. Groups of kids should be served by groups of adults who have time structured in their day to meet and review how the kids are doing and which adult should spend additional time with which kid based on the attributes of the adult and the progress of the kids. We should include paraprofessionals in this discourse as well. In fact it will take fewer teachers to teach kids in this manner if the teachers are diagnosing and prescribing while other teachers and aides are delivering the prescription. This means abolishing the teacher pupil ratio altogether because groups of adults will serve groups of kids. How many adults with what level of training and education will be dependent upon the attributes of the kids, not a one-size fits all formula implemented via the wisdom of legislators. We will have to maintain quality professional development, but it will become focused when a group of teachers realize a group of kids are not making progress and seek those who can assist them in their efforts. This will work. The medical profession and universities and plumbers and electricians, etc., have been doing it for years.

#5. I'd stop grouping kids by age. Ludicrous, especially when they are young. If we re-structure the school day and the staffing as proposed above we can accelerate the instruction of those who are ready, and supplement the instruction of those who are not. Obviously, this will require the elimination of the horrific standardized high stakes test by grade and subject. We could still give tests, but the data will be used for diagnostic planning, not to flail failures. Out with the 8th grade math standardized high stakes test and in with a math test that is in fact norm-referenced and will give teachers an idea about which kid is really ready to move on to algebra, statistics, probability, etc., and which kid still needs work with number sense and basic operations. Kids could graduate from high school whenever they master the curriculum goals needed to demonstrate that they have done so. Some kids may get a high school diploma when they are 10 years old and choose to hang around until they are 18 to get post-diploma hours. That should be OK.

#6. I'd bump all extra-curricular activities to the private sector or to a county-wide parks and recreation program. It's headed there anyway. College scouts are spending more time looking at "select" team participants than high school athletes anyway. Co-curricular activities in the areas of the arts should increase. School returns to its fundamental mission and operates much more economically.

There is more, much more. But I shall stop here for fear of moving from a post to a treatise. Just imagine, a school where children and young adults want to attend, where parents want their kids to be successful, where the adults are motivated to conspire together to support student success, and where all will eventually get a high school diploma with emphasis in the areas they select, all for less taxpayer money and greater educator support!

Way too cool to be easy to achieve. Way too rational to be implemented. Perhaps way too threatening to the herd of sacred cows. No bull!

I still think it is possible.

How we get from where we are to where we could be merits at least one more installment in this series.

Until then, bless all of you in public education as youngsters from across this great land prepare to begin yet another school year. Help them to the best of your potential!

POSTED BY EILEEN GOOD AT 11:48 AM


1 COMMENTS:



Anonymous said...

I want to work at that school!