From the editor

I'd like to take this opportunity to make plugs for a couple of worthy web sites.

One I've been promoting for a few weeks now: our sister site, Education News Colorado -- www.ednewscolorado.org If you haven't visited it yet, I urge you to do so. Todd Engdahl, a veteran Denver newspaper journalist, is doing an impressive job covering education issues cropping up during the current legislative session. You'll find regular legislative updates, a smattering of other education news, and, for those of you with a wonky streak, a legislative bill tracker, to keep you current with the latest twists and turns in the legislative process. I know of no other site like this anywhere in the country. And it's only going to get better.

The other site is called Manual Math Revolution. It's a blog overseen by Manual High School math teacher Dave Singer, an energetic and idealistic teacher who is pushing his ninth-graders hard every day. As the second semester began, Dave decided to keep a public journal about the ups and downs of teaching math in an inner-city high school. He writes well, so it's always entertaining. But what makes the blog unique is that Dave is having his students occasionally write some of the posts. Here's an excerpt from a post by Iasiha:

I feel that once we fully understand collaborative learning community we will get even farther in math. Yesterday we worked on Excel and Power Point...I helped Saul with his work, and as I helped him I realized that I am contributing to the collaborative learning community. I helped Saul clarify his work! I felt as if that was a step ahead of building a relationship with another student. I look forward to seeing where this upper math class leads to.

Dave doesn't gloss over the challenges the class faces. The blog makes good reading, and gives outsiders a very real look at what life is like inside an urban classroom. Pay a visit, and leave a comment for Dave and his students.

The e-newsletter will be on hiatus next week because the editor will be attending a family wedding in Hawaii. Tough duty, and no apologies!

--Alan Gottlieb

Competition ad collaboration: a principal's life

One of my colleagues - a middle school principal - called to arrange a time to come to my school to recruit my fifth grade students for his school.  I must admit that I did not return the call because I hope to keep my fifth grade students for my new sixth grade class for next year -- the first step in expanding to an ECE-8 model.  As the principal, I have to advocate and fight for the changes happening at my school, which often come into conflict with the way things used to be in our northwest Denver neighborhood. 

Competition for resources between schools is common.  Schools compete with one another for students -- the more students we get, the more money we get.  We lure in families and students by offering and boasting:  unique programs, before and after-school activities, dress codes, academic interventions, electives and arts classes, athletics, etc.

In short, many of my colleagues and I must work hard to gather and keep students in our schools and there are few incentives to help one another in these endeavors.  Too often our innovations are not geared towards what will actually serve our students and families --  providing excellent instruction and demanding student progress.

Denver Public Schools has embraced creating a diversity of school models to offer students different options:  ECE-5, ECE-8, 6-8, 6-12.  These schools now overlap neighborhoods and attendance areas and therefore compete for students and families.  This competition generally increases the options for families, allowing students, theoretically at least, to attend schools that best fit their needs. 

But the competition may also put principals in the position of developing school "bells and whistles" in order to attract families.  My fear is that we may not be sufficiently planning school programs and offerings strategically in geographical areas, based on demographic data, parent desire and most of all, student need.

A diversity of educational offerings is a good thing, but we need to work together to market the programs we can effectively offer.  Each school cannot offer everything to every student.  Somehow we need to find a balance between prodding one another to develop more effective and attractive programs to our clients and collaborating with one another to realize a system of schools that makes it less likely that students will fail.

Because we will begin our expansion to an ECE-8 model next year, I spent time with an assistant principal at North High School recently so that I would better understand the requirements students must meet to qualify for the highest level of ninth grade courses.  Too often, middle school principals are not well-informed about what students need to be able to do to succeed in high school. 

As valuable as this meeting was to me, it represents just one small and isolated step.  We need to build a system of schools and of educating students, within which students will not be casualties.

I recently attended a meeting with a number of principals, school board members and area residents representing some northwest Denver schools.  Given the challenges outlined above, we began to discuss how we can work together to ensure that students in our area receive a seamless experience from ECE through twelfth grade. 

The conversation was both exciting and murky.  We all seemed to agree that high school graduation success is dependent on each of the many earlier school years.  We all seemed to agree that building a strong sense of community and belonging contribute to student success in high school.  We all did agree that 84 percent of entering ninth grade students performing below grade level, is too many.

            What is needed is a system (not a bureaucracy) of schools in which students will experience common academic and behavior expectations, common instructional practices, common goals and agreements, and a balanced offering of extra-curricular programs. 

We must envision and plan for a number of paths from age three to high school graduation in which students will be cared for, pushed and held accountable.  This will require principals to work together, outside of our school walls and beyond our traditional school levels (elementary, middle and high).

School officials and community organizations are working together to develop collaborative and systematic efforts in several parts of our city.  Schools such as Bruce Randolph and Manual, networks such as the Far Northeast Denver schools and initiatives such as Senator Peter Groff's proposed legislation all offer exciting developments and opportunities. 

The group described above will reconvene and continue the work of collaborating.  I believe we have entered a renaissance of opportunities for public education, especially within Denver Public Schools.  This is a time to be innovative and take calculated risks. 

We have tried many different ways to organize our schools -- geographical areas, similar programs, similar levels. Currently, we work together in networks of schools serving the same grade level.  But we continue to work in isolation from one another -- swamped within our individual schools.

 I will continue my work in the northwest area, bridging with other middle schools and with our neighboring North High School.

 Blog highlights

School choice appealing, but lacks evidence

Sunday, February 10, 2008
Written by: Captain Haddock

Uncle Charley was kind enough to respond to my blog post last week comparing the education platforms of the various donkeys and elephants in the Presidential race.

On the charge of snideness, I plead guilty -- I am merely speaking the unofficial dialect of the blogger.  As for my presumed discomfort with the two Dem candidates, as with most left-leaners, I am enthusiastic about both of the lilly-livered liberals left in the race. 

I'd would like to pick up on one criticism Uncle Charley throws out:  his frustration at "knee-jerk" opposition to school choice.   The issue is frequently presented as a war between liberals content to turn public schools into propaganda tools of the socialist bureaucracy on the one hand, and free marketers ready to sell the naming rights of your kindergartner's classroom to ExxonMobil on the other. 

What seems to be rarely mentioned in these discussions is that there is virtually no research evidence supporting either position.  The stated claim of choice supporters is that it creates competition and therefore raises the levels of all ships, particularly as measured by achievement scores.  But could somebody please point me to the body of research that compellingly leads to this conclusion? 

On the other hand, school choice has a lot of intuitively appealing aspects, including the ability to create schools targeted to certain populations. For now, then, I remain agnostic.

One Response to "School choice appealing, but lacks evidence"

1. Quique Says:
   February 11th, 2008 at 8:58 am e

From what I can tell, the research evidence in support of vouchers comes almost exclusively from a small group of pro-market researchers, like Jay Greene, Caroline Hoxby and Paul Peterson. I don't think we should discount their research just because they believe in the marketplace as the best way to distribute education or because their work is funded by other pro-market people and organizations. But I do think it is troubling that so much of their work has never been peer reviewed and has weaknesses pointed out by other researchers (an example of which was recently pointed out by "pol econ ed": http://www.headfirstcolorado.org/blog/index.php/2008-02-07/special-needs-scholarships-a-worthy-idea/#comments).

Dismissing choice research is shallow thinking

Monday, February 11, 2008
Written by: Uncle Charley

Following a post where Captain Haddock wrote school choice "lacks evidence," Quique comments:

From what I can tell, the research evidence in support of vouchers comes almost exclusively from a small group of pro-market researchers, like Jay Greene, Caroline Hoxby and Paul Peterson. I don't think we should discount their research just because they believe in the marketplace as the best way to distribute education or because their work is funded by other pro-market people and organizations. But I do think it is troubling that so much of their work has never been peer reviewed and has weaknesses pointed out by other researchers….

But this paragraph just provides a dismissal of research that would inconveniently challenge certain presuppositions. What's the problem?

1. The research "comes almost exclusively from a small group of pro-market researchers…," writes Quique. But I say: Is truth based on the number of people who dedicate themselves to studying an issue? And if it is, should opponents of school choice be unsettled that more researchers than the ones you mentioned are taking up the task?

Also, I'm glad we shouldn't dismiss their research just "because their work is funded by other pro-market people and organizations." Bringing them up at all, though, is mostly a distraction: What vested interest do these groups have in dispersing the education system's power among millions of consumers? What credible research shows the return they stand to gain?

2. But here comes the real wallop: "I do think it is troubling that so much of their work has never been peer reviewed and has weaknesses pointed out by other researchers…." This claim ignores the fact that much of the work demonstrating positive effects from vouchers has been peer reviewed. Some was cited as evidence in the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court Zelman decision. There's plenty of high-quality empirical research on school choice programs if you're willing to look for it.

That other researchers can identify weaknesses tells us very little, as this is true for the vast majority of social science academic work. How serious and substantive are the alleged weaknesses that still allow so much research to pass peer review? How much peer-reviewed research refutes the pro-school choice findings? And do other researchers identify weaknesses in the opposition, as well?

The most interesting facet of this little debate is that the research does not present a glowing, white-washed picture of school choice. Findings are more nuanced, showing (mostly small) gains in some areas, no changes in others. But how could we expect to see more than small positive results with so many limits on existing school choice programs and so relatively few students participating? Instead, bring forward the peer-reviewed research demonstrating negative effects from school choice, and make a fair comparison.

No, vouchers are not a panacea. But to dismiss so much high-quality research out-of-hand does not strengthen the seriousness of the opposition's case.

Georgia, and NCLB, on my mind

Friday, February 8, 2008
Written by: Curtis D. Holmes

I was reflecting on the Georgia primary and its three way Republican split and 2-1 Obama victory outcome. If there is anything obvious about this political season it is the diversity of the American electorate. The values and affiliations of the American public span the range of the political spectrum. It definitely brings home that what is good for Georgia isn't necessarily good for New Hampshire or California. Even what is good for some Georgians isn't necessarily good for others.

What this calls into question for me is the politics of divisiveness that has been more or less the hallmark of this administration. In education, that approach is best represented in the No Child Left Behind law and its centralized, bureaucratized, and one-size-fits-all approach. While throwing the states and districts marginal flexibility, the core of the law remains a rigid, prescribed strategy.

Education is far too important to be the political football it has become. Reform approaches require long-term commitment, not constantly shifting support based on which party now happens holds the majority. The imposition of majoritarian solutions to educational problems guarantees an enduring instability.

What we need, more than ever, is a new politics of education, one that grows out of a consensus of what kind of education system we wish to construct. There can be all kinds of experimentation and forms to meet the diverse needs of the country, but the one foundational non-negotiable must be based on the American tradition that everyone is entitled to a free, adequate public education.

Without that, we lose the commitment to democracy and individual choice that allows that diversity of the electorate to flourish.

Reforms hopeful, but not the whole answer

Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Written by: Visionary Teacher

Reading about the current advances in school and budgetary reform has me hopeful that Denver is embarking upon a new era, where students' needs are placed first.  Yet as I sit here on a lazy Sunday afternoon planning out my week with my students, I wonder how far this reform can reach.  Even if these funds come through, my class size is lowered, I get an assistant, and more (allow me to dream for a moment), will it be enough?

Every single classroom in our school building contains students with extremely high needs.   These needs are social, emotional, academic, behavioral; you name it, we've got several.  Many of our students have a family member (or more) in jail, have lived or currently live in a motel, don't have anyone in their family who has graduated from high school, let alone college, and don't know where their next meal is coming from.

In the classroom, this translates into poor attendance, difficulty concentrating, being ill prepared, and, in the worst cases, very disruptive behavior.  With enough support systems, most of these challenges can be overcome.  Unfortunately one extreme student can negatively impact the entire group day in and day out.

I'm not referring to the average child who didn't get enough sleep, doesn't want to learn, and wanders around the room.  I'm focusing on the chair throwing, table climbing, "I'm angry because my mom passed away and my dad refuses to get any help for me" child. What can we do for him if dad won't sign the paperwork and accept any resources?

Or maybe I'm the child who lives with 80-year-old grandma who can't take it anymore and I get bumped from foster home to foster home.   Who advocates for me?

Solve that problem in the many forms that it takes, and you will see CSAP scores rise across the city.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comment form