Saving a school

Michael Brick’s Saving the School  tells the story of Austin’s Reagan High School, a turnaround school that actually turned out better than it started, writes Pamela Tatz on Education Gadfly.

The book follows the principal, a young science teacher, the basketball coach and a star student athlete.

“At Reagan, the principal scoured the neighborhood to locate truants. The science teacher opened her home to her students for Bible study, free meals, and a sympathetic ear. The coach’s deep and enduring connection to his team helped revive the school’s flagging spirit. And the students responded.”

But it wasn’t easy.

 

Writing revolution: Back to the past

A Staten Island high school with mostly poor and working-class students, New Dorp High was tired of failure. After trying various reforms, such as small learning communities, Principal Deirdre DeAngelis and her faculty set a goal:  Teach students to write clearly.

When students learned to write — in history and science, as well as English — they learned to read, argue and analyze, writes Peg Tyre in The Atlantic. Test scores rose significantly and the graduation rate soared.

Nell Scharff, a lecturer at Baruch College, worked with teachers to figure out why New Dorp students couldn’t write. The poor writers had basic reading skills, but didn’t use “coordinating conjunctions to link and expand on simple ideas—words like forandnorbutoryet, and so.”

Teacher Fran Simmons asked her freshman English students to read Of Mice and Men and answer a prompt in a single sentence:

“Although George …”

. . . More than a few wrote the following: “Although George and Lenny were friends.”

Twenty-five years ago, schools of education began teaching new teachers that writing should be “caught, not taught,” says Steven Graham, a professor of education instruction at Arizona State.

Roughly, it was supposed to work like this: Give students interesting creative-writing assignments; put that writing in a fun, social context in which kids share their work. . . . Formal lessons in grammar, sentence structure, and essay-writing took a back seat to creative expression.

. . . For most of the 1990s, elementary- and middle-­school children kept journals in which they wrote personal narratives, poetry, and memoirs and engaged in “peer editing,” without much attention to formal composition. Middle- and high-school teachers were supposed to provide the expository- and persuasive-writing instruction.

Many kids didn’t “catch” writing, writes Dorp.  Pressured to raise reading scores, secondary school teachers neglected writing instruction.

The principal sent New Dorp teachers for training at Windward, a private school for children with language-related learning disabilities.

Children . . .  are explicitly taught how to turn ideas into simple sentences, and how to construct complex sentences from simple ones by supplying the answer to three prompts—butbecause, and so. They are instructed on how to use appositive clauses to vary the way their sentences begin. Later on, they are taught how to recognize sentence fragments, how to pull the main idea from a paragraph, and how to form a main idea on their own.

In every class but math, New Dorp students wrote.  In chemistry class, Monica DiBella had to describe the elements with subordinating clauses.

Although … “hydrogen is explosive and oxygen supports combustion,” Monica wrote, “a compound of them puts out fires.”

Unless … “hydrogen and oxygen form a compound, they are explosive and dangerous.”

Learning parts of speech improved Monica’s reading comprehension. Before, I could read, sure. But it was like a sea of words,” she says. “The more writing instruction I got, the more I understood which words were important.”

In class discussions, students were required to use certain phrases, such as: “I agree/disagree with ___ because …”

In Monica’s fifth-period-English discussion of the opening scene of Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman, teacher Angelo Caterina asks why Willie Loman is so tired.

“Willie Loman seems tired because he is getting old,” ventured a curly-haired girl who usually sat in the front. “Can you explain your answer?,” Monica called out. The curly-haired girl bit her lip while her eyes searched the book in front of her. “The stage direction says he’s 63. That’s old!”

. . .  “I agree that his age is listed in the stage direction,” said John Feliciano. “But I disagree with your conclusion. I think he is tired because his job is very hard and he has to travel a lot.”

Robert Fawcett, a loose-limbed boy in a white T-shirt, got his turn. Robert had been making money working alongside the school’s janitors. “I disagree with those conclusions,” he said, glancing at the prompts. “The way Willie Loman describes his job suggests that the kind of work he does is making him tired. It is repetitive. It can feel pointless. It can make you feel exhausted.”

New Dorp is now considered a model school, writes Tyre.

Common Core Standards stress expository and analytic writing over personal narratives, she notes. But many writing experts think students will be bored by lessons in grammar, sentence structure and argument. Creative writing will motivate students, they believe.

Meanwhile, Monica DiBella is applying to college. Her Regents scores predict she’s ready.  “I always wanted to go to college, but I never had the confidence that I could say and write the things I know.” She smiles and sweeps the bangs from her eyes. “Then someone showed me how.”

‘Strategic staffing’ is oversold

On the cover of School Administrator, heroic-looking educators parachute into a school.  “Landing your best forces in schools with greatest needs” promotes a story lauding Charlotte-Mecklenberg’s success in turning around troubled schools. “Strategic staffing” — sending strong principals and teachers to weak schools — has “exceeded expectations,” writes Deputy Superintendent Ann Clark.

In fall of 2008, Charlotte-Mecklenberg paid bonuses to lure star principals and teachers to seven low-performing schools. No strategic staffing school has met the campaign’s goal – 90 percent of students at grade level in three years –reports the Charlotte Observer.

In 2012, four of the seven pilot schools had pass rates of 50 percent or lower. Devonshire Elementary, the strongest of the seven, had 71 percent on grade level.

The strategic staffing schools have improved, but so have most low-performing schools in the state, reports the Observer.  A tough new test set scores plummeting in 2008, just before the new principals took over. The next year, the state started requiring students who failed exams to try again. Across the state, scores surged.
In 2012, scores fell in the seven original schools, though newly added “strategic” schools improved.

 Clark’s article, written before the 2012 test scores were released, concludes that strategic staffing will become obsolete because of its success.

“A school district’s courage has led to academic success for students in the lowest-performing schools,” she writes. “To think all it took was recognizing talented principals and teachers and inviting them to share their talents with our neediest children and schools.”

At four of the seven original schools, the principal brought in to transform the school has gone. Closing three middle schools and sending older students into low-performing elementary schools also has caused problems. bbbbbbbb

Making school turnarounds work

School Turnarounds by Heather Zavadsky looks at how districts are trying to improve chronically low-performing schools.

A blue ribbon for cheating?

National Blue Ribbon School Awards are going to schools with suspicious test score spikes, charges the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in its Cheating Our Children series. Once the award only went to schools with a long record of success, but now a school with disadvantaged students and a single year of high scores can win the award.

SILVER SPRING, Md. — Twelve miles from the White House, Highland Elementary epitomized the government’s aspirations for public schools. Highland, it seemed, was leaving no child behind.

In just three years, Highland had gone from the verge of a state takeover to reporting that virtually every student passed standardized reading exams. . . . Highland did it with huge proportions of students who lived in poverty and, perhaps more important, who came from homes where no one spoke English.

The school’s turnaround was “absolutely remarkable,” said Education Secretary Arne Duncan, when he presented the award in 2009.

“And remarkably unlikely,” conclude reporters.

Statistically improbable test scores spiked at dozens of schools in the year they applied for the award, the analysis found. In that year, suspicious gains occurred about three times more often in Blue Ribbon winners than at all schools nationwide.

At a Brooklyn elementary school, 15 percent of fourth-graders posted advanced scores in 2008, 81 percent in 2009. The odds are one in 30 million, the newspaper estimates.

When Ray Myrtle, a veteran principal, took over Highland Elementary in 2006, only 16 percent of the school’s fifth-graders scored at the advanced level on the Maryland reading exam. In 2007, that rose to 24 percent, not a surprising gain.

In 2008, that number shot up to 80 percent, then to 94 percent in 2009 before slipping to 86 percent in 2010.

Myrtle was hailed as a miracle worker.

. . . But then, in the first full school year after the Blue Ribbon award, just 42 percent of Highland’s fifth-graders scored in the advanced range — a drop of more than half in one year. Other grades recorded similar declines.

Myrtle retired in 2010. Montgomery County, Maryland school officials deny that cheating boosted test scores.

Tinkering, not transforming

Washington state’s share of $3 billion in federal School Improvement Grants isn’t funding significant change at turnaround schools, concludes Tinkering Toward Transformation by the University of Washington’s Center on Reinventing Education.

. . . with some exceptions, districts and schools in Washington state are approaching the turnaround work in ways only marginally different from past school improvement efforts. Despite the hard work of administrators, principals, and especially teachers, the majority of schools studied show little evidence of the type of bold and transformative changes the SIGs were intended to produce.

Two of nine schools studied took a comprehensive approach to rethinking instruction, analyzing data and improving the school climate, while the rest adopted “a hodgepodge of intervention strategies.”

 

Time alone isn’t enough

Extending the school day without improving teaching won’t make much difference, concludes a new Education Sector report,  Off the Clock: What More Time Can (and Can’t) Do for School Turnarounds.

More than 90 percent of the schools receiving federal School Improvement Grants have chosen turnaround options that call for more class time. Some have added class time by shortening recess and lunch. Others have created after-school programs.

“New designs for extended time should be a part of the nation’s school improvement plans,” (author Elena) Silva concludes. “But policymakers and school leaders must recognize that successful schools use time not just to extend hours and days but to creatively improve how and by whom instruction is delivered.”

The limited research on extended learning time (ELT) shows only small effects on student achievement, the report concludes. “Schools that have succeeded with extended time have done so largely because they include time as part of a more comprehensive reform.” Just doing the same old thing for an extra 20 minutes a day isn’t going to help.

Can parents run their kids’ schools?

Eventually, parents will take over their children’s low-performing school using “parent trigger” laws. (Adelanto, California parents have resubmitted their petition.) Can parents run their kids schools any better than the pros? asks Andrew Rotherham in Time. Even bad schools can get worse, he warns.

Adelanto parents distrust outside charter operators. If they can’t agree with the district on improving Desert Trails Elementary, they plan to turn it into a community-run school. Turning around an existing school is a huge challenge, Rotherham writes.  ”Let’s face it – if it were easy to run great schools, we’d have more of them.”

To avoid chaos, he suggests a supermajority — perhaps two-thirds of parents — be required to trigger a takeover.  That would ensure a “core consensus.”

However, parent involvement in running schools has a “decidedly mixed” record, he writes. In the ’60s, New York City created community-run schools that “fired white teachers without cause and sparked a legendary teacher strike,” he writes.

As the father of school-aged children, it’s hard for me to oppose the parent trigger, and I don’t. But I do see school choice as a more sustainable way to give parents options and control in the long run. . . .  I’m cautious about what we can expect once parents pull that trigger. When it comes to handling real firearms, there are some age-old axioms: never point a gun at anything you don’t intend to shoot, and never fire unless you know where the round is going to end up. In this case these rules apply to schools as well.

I share Rotherham’s concerns. Parents may find a charter operator with the expertise needed to run a school. If they try to do it themselves, at a school with a history of failure, they’ll face a very steep learning curve.

Flexibility surprises

There are a few surprises in the U.S. Education Department’s flexibility plan, writes Anne Hyslop on Quick and the Ed’s Waiver Wire

The broad strokes of the plan are what we’ve known all along: higher expectations for students based on better standards and assessments; state-designed accountability systems, with discretion to determine how schools should be labeled based on their performance and the interventions they should undertake; annual teacher and principal evaluation systems that are based, in part, on student’s academic growth; and funding flexibility within Title I and Title II to support these reforms.

The good news, writes Hyslop, is that waiver-winning states will have to report college enrollment and credit-accumulation rates for all students (disaggregated into subgroups) by district and high school.

. . . collecting and reporting these specific outcomes will provide policymakers, educators, and the public with real evidence of college readiness. I would have added remediation rates to this list, but I am please that the administration is encouraging states to link high school and postsecondary outcomes.

In addition, states will have to try to do something about 15 percent of schools, not just the bottom 5 percent.

The feds will work with states to evaluate the effectiveness of reform strategies.

On the negative side, Hyslop is disappointed that states won’t be required to use their new teacher evaluation systems to ensure that low-income and minority children have equal access to effective teachers. They won’t even be required to report who gets the best teachers.

 

Newark’s failing schools swap teachers

The $5 million turnaround plan for three low-performing Newark high schools required replacing half the teachers. Instead of letting principals hire new teachers, the schools swapped teachers. Some 68 teachers were shuffled among Malcom X Shabazz High, Central High School and Barringer High School, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis.

Shabazz, which employs 90 teachers, sent 21 to Barringer, which sent 21 over to Shabazz. Central teachers also ended up at Shabazz and Barringer, though the school didn’t take as many transfers.

“Federal money may have unintentionally funded the infamous ‘dance of the lemons’ that has been a harmful practice in districts for decades,” said Tim Daly, president of the New Teacher Project, a nonprofit group that helps school districts recruit teachers.

“If these teachers truly were not good enough for one struggling school, we have to ask whether it is a good idea to put them in another one,” he said.

Cami Anderson, who became superintendent in May, vows to stop the swaps, but it will cost money to pay the salaries of unwanted teachers. New Jersey law requires the district to pay tenured teachers, even if no principal will hire them.

Test scores are up significantly at Central High — let’s hope they’re not cheating — but have remained the same or lower at Barringer and Shabazz.