Living in Dialogue

From Sacramento, California, we got news this week of a strange new practice. Several high schools and middle schools have organized race-based “heritage” assemblies not to celebrate Black History Month, or Cesar Chavez day, but to promote improved achievement on state tests.

According to this report in the Sacramento Bee, one high school held several separate assemblies at the same time; students had to choose between African American, Pacific Islander, and Latino-themed rallies. “Last year we scored the highest percentage increase of any group,” the African American students were told.

The school justifies this segregation by citing the need to motivate students to do well on the tests, which otherwise have no effect on their individual status. Many schools are conducting other activities designed to motivate students, including recognition and rewards for improved scores. But the race-based rallies are a new, and disturbing twist, especially in light of some other news this week.

A study was released from Stanford University which examined the impact of the California high school exit exam (CAHSEE). Researchers, led by Sean Reardon, compared students who took the exam in 2005, for whom the results were inconsequential, to those who took it later, when it determined if they would receive a diploma.

They found some fascinating things. First of all, contrary to fears, the exit exam does not seem to have substantially increased the number of students who drop out prior to completing high school. However, the exam did result in a large number of low-achieving students failing to graduate, as a result of their diplomas being withheld.

In the cohort of students not subject to the requirement, a typical student in the bottom quartile of 10th grade achievement had a roughly 45% probability of graduating from his or her original district; in the cohorts subject to the requirement, the same student had a 30% probability of graduation. Our difference‐in‐difference estimates indicate that the CAHSEE requirement caused at least 11 percentage points of the decline in graduation rates (and as much as 15 percentage points). These figures imply that roughly 3.6%‐4.5% of California high school students (roughly 18,000‐22,500 students per year) do not graduate as a result of the high school exit exam policy.

The most interesting finding was that certain groups were affected more than others.

Minority students perform less well on the CAHSEE exam than do white students with the same level of prior and current academic achievement (as measured by 8th, 9th, and 10th grade performance on the California Standards Tests). Female students perform less well on the math CAHSEE test than do boys with the same level of academic achievement. This pattern of results is consistent with ‘stereotype threat’ explanations of test performance.

Stereotype threat is the phenomenon whereby the fear that if one performs poorly on a high‐stakes test it will confirm a negative societal stereotype about one’s group leads to increased test anxiety among negatively stereotyped student groups—minority students and girls, for example—which in turn leads such students to underperform on such tests relative to similarly skilled non‐stereotyped students. The evidence suggests that the high‐stakes nature of the CAHSEE test induces minority students and girls to underperform on the CAHSEE, relative to what their prior academic performance (on low‐stakes tests) would predict. Failure to pass the CAHSEE for these groups leads to lower graduation rates. Thus, it is not that the CAHSEE test is biased, but that the high stakes nature of the exit exam testing situation combined with the presence of negative societal stereotypes about the academic skill of minority students and girls (in math) leads to underperformance by minority students and girls.

These findings have me wondering about the paradoxical affect of one of the key elements of No Child Left Behind – the highlighting of racial subgroups. This “spotlight” on the achievement gap is supposed to force schools to do a better job with historically underserved groups. What happens when this spotlight is shined on the gap in the context of race-based motivational rallies? It seems to me that this might have the effect of strengthening stereotype threat, by reminding students of the poor standing of their subgroup. I also wonder about the nature of the achievement gap itself, and how much of it might be attributed to stereotype threat.

Lastly, I can only assume that there are few, if any, white students at these schools. A rally to celebrate white test score supremacy is simply too weird to imagine.

Update: An interesting resource for anyone interested in exploring the concept of stereotype threat: http://www.reducingstereotypethreat.org/

What do you think?

Is anyone else experiencing racially based rallies for test motivation?

How do you think this sort of emphasis on the different performances of racial subgroups will affect our students?

Mightn't this sort of thing intensify stereotype threat, given that African American and Latino performance is usually lower than that of other groups?

image: Creative Commons: thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/12/

Posted by Anthony Cody at 11:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBacks (0)

I must confess I am a bit turned off by all the talk about “tough standards.” I am all for high expectations, but I became a teacher to share joy and creativity with students, not to be a taskmaster. Sometimes a bit of tough love is needed, but how can we get back to the real basics, the joy of learning something new? My colleague (and music teacher) Nancy Flanagan wrote recently about the value of creativity.

Even without a randomized trial evaluating the precise measurable impact of strategies designed to expand thinking-- isn't it worth the attempt to create an environment where the hatching of new ideas is nurtured, and kids' brains get to go out and play?

This seems ever so much more urgent these days, now that the ways we are accustomed to doing things seem to be leading us off a cliff. Einstein once said “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” We need new ways of thinking, and the only way we will get them is to unleash the creativity of our students.

Today I offer some images from my own day of play. I joined my friend environmental artist Zach Pine, on Stinson Beach in Marin County. He hosted a special Earth Day art event, which was attended by scores of people. Zach taught us to make spheres of sand, which can be placed in the environment, where they look very cool. Other people used objects from the beach or nearby hillside to create their sculptures. Zach works with a group called the Children in Nature Collaborative, devoted to expanding opportunities for children to explore and play in the outdoors.

Here are some more photos from today’s event (click to enlarge):

One more quote from Einstein. "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."

What do you do to bring out the creative side of your students? What do you think the role of creativity is in the 21st century classroom?

Posted by Anthony Cody at 7:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

And should teachers encourage them to do so?

Do you remember Carl Chew? He is a teacher in the state of Washington who became famous last Spring when he refused to administer the state achievement test (WASL) to his 6th grade students. Chew was suspended for two weeks as a result of his action. This week he turned the spotlight on efforts to get parents to “opt out” of the state test. He writes:

There is one powerful group in Washington though with a legal means to end the WASL and suffer no retribution, and that is parents. If even a third of the parents who say they are against high-stakes testing were to opt their children out of the WASL it would deal a statistical and thus mortal blow to the test. It is easy to opt out. Your children will go to school during the testing weeks, but miraculously go on learning instead of stressing out on confusing, unfair, and biased test booklets.

He refers parents to a website run by Mothers Against WASL.

He explained the reasons he refused to give the tests in an open letter last spring.

I performed this single act of civil disobedience based on personal moral and ethical grounds, as well as professional duty. I believe that the WASL is destructive to our children, teachers, schools, and parents.

Further:

Most, if not all, teachers will agree that assessment is vital. Wise teachers know that assessments which are also learning experiences for students and teachers are the best. The WASL categorically is not a learning experience.

I believe that individual students are entitled to their own learning plans, tailored to their own needs, strengths and interests. Teachers know it is definitely possible to do this in the context of a public school. The WASL categorically treats all children alike and requires that they each fit into the same precise mold, and state-mandated learning plans based on WASL scores fail to recognize individual strengths of students.

When I was a teacher at Graham Hill Elementary in Seattle, a number of my students received their WASL scores to find that they had "failed". When I looked at the notices being sent to their parents I saw that each student had come to within just a few points of actually passing and that their scores were well within the gray area, or "margin of error," for the test. The "test scientists" aren't sure whether the student passed or failed, yet the school tells the student he or she failed. These students cried when they saw the results.

No one ever asked me or any of the teachers I know whether high-stakes testing was a good idea. In fact, we teachers are made to jump through seemingly endless hoops to prove our worthiness to be professional, certificated educators. Public school teachers are responsible for the educational lives of over a million students in Washington state, yet, in the end, no one actually wants to listen to what teachers have to say about what is best for the students in our care.

His recent message concludes:

I hope I have gained enough credibility by my thoughtful actions to have you consider this possibility. Teachers who refuse to give the WASL in Washington risk similar penalties as mine, and they will simply be replaced by a substitute to administer the test. Parents truly hold the winning cards here. Talk to your friends and forward this email to others who feel the same way as you do. You can start the ball rolling.

UPDATE: The National Union of Teachers in the United Kingdom has passed a resolution calling for a boycott of the national tests.

Hazel Danson, of the NUT's executive which proposed the motion said that league tables are 'rigged' because they force schools to focus on borderline pupils who can push up their overall score.

She said: 'It's tantamount to government-funded cheating, and we can't be complicit in that anymore.'

What do you think of Carl Chew’s stance? Are there significant numbers of parents out there willing to opt out? Is this an effective or wise response for those unhappy with the emphasis on tests?

Posted by Anthony Cody at 4:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

In gang and prison culture, there are no elected leaders. Instead, whoever has the muscle and political savvy to gain power becomes the one in charge. These people are referred to as the "shot-callers," because they make the important decisions. It seems to me that in American education, in spite of all our hopes about the change Obama may bring, we may be continuing to move towards a culture in which powerful figures call the shots.

Case in point: the news this week that Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Tuesday that mayors should take control of big-city school districts where academic performance is suffering.

Duncan said mayoral control provides the strong leadership and stability needed to overhaul urban schools.

"At the end of my tenure, if only seven mayors are in control, I think I will have failed," Duncan said.

He offered to do whatever he can to make the case. "I'll come to your cities," Duncan said. "I'll meet with your editorial boards. I'll talk with your business communities. I will be there."

"And you wonder why school systems are struggling," Duncan said. "What business would run that way?

"

After the forum, Duncan told The Associated Press that urban schools need someone who is accountable to voters and driving all of a city's resources behind children.

"Part of the reason urban education has struggled historically is you haven't had that leadership from the top," he said.

I know in my city of Oakland, the current mayor has far too much on his plate to take on the school district. When then-mayor Jerry Brown tried to run the district about 8 years ago, he quickly found himself in way over his head, and wound up backing away from the whole project.

I also wonder about the people who Duncan has indicated he will be talking to about this. Business leaders and editorial boards. Apparently these are the shot-callers in our cities. And while he says he wants power in the hands of someone "accountable to voters," he is focusing his effort not on voters, or on the school boards they do elect, but on unelected business leaders who seem to be calling the shots these days.

And what about teachers? What kind of the place of the table is for us when mayors are in charge? Most of these big city mayors seem to decide very quickly that our unions are the biggest obstacles to reform. And it has not been my experience that the trouble with reform efforts is that they are not top-down enough. It seems to me that we have had top-down reforms for years, and what we need is not more of the same. We need leadership from the bottom up! Isn't that the "Yes, we can" model championed by our president?

UPDATE: Since I wrote this, historian and policy expert Diane Ravitch published an opinion piece in the New York Times providing deeper context to this issue. And my colleague teacherken has also explored the flaws in this approach in a new blog entry on the DailyKos.

So what do you think? If you are from a city where the mayor has taken control of the schools, how has that helped or hurt? Who calls the shots in YOUR community?

Posted by Anthony Cody at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)