Monday, May 18, 2009

Raising Academic Achievement Two Models Tried

As I thoughtfully prepare for my next blog, I read many newspaper and some research articles that relate to my current thinking. Whenever I read, I try to connect what I read to my ongoing belief about what is necessary for improving academic achievement. Those who have read my previous blog entries know my mantra by now. I feel strongly that schools can only improve academic achievement if we look at schools as systems and if we try to correct the barriers that exist to student achievement by reviewing our current system.

Having been working very closely with several urban schools as a consultant since early February, I am able to better see where the needs for change are in most of our schools. I remember clearly telling one of our recent past superintendents, and his instructional superintendent that I would support anything that they chose to place in the school to improve academic achievement, but I also know that if we don’t make other changes in our school, this new great idea will not make a difference. I still feel the same way.

Interestingly, this morning while reading Smart Briefs by ASCD, two articles were summarized from two big city newspapers. They were timely and seemed worth commenting on at this time as we all try to figure out how to raise graduation rates, lower drop out rates, increase the number of students prepared and interested in post-secondary educational opportunities, and provide our nation and economy with students ready to enter the world of work successfully.

Miami-Dade County instituted a program several years ago with the hope of raising the achievement level of students in their lowest performing schools. The Miami Herald reported the following: “A $100 million investment in Miami-Dade County's lowest performing public schools failed to boost student achievement, according to the school district's final report on the program.

The School Improvement Zone was a three-year push at 39 elementary, middle and senior high schools throughout the county. Students participated in a specialized reading program and had a longer school day than students at other schools. They also had a longer school year.” As thoughtful educators, this research provides us with a wealth of conversational possibilities. Why might such a major effort, targeted at specific schools with lots of financial resources provided, not lead to better outcomes for the students in this School Improvement Zone?

A second article from the Baltimore Sun was included in the same ASCD Smart Brief today. It describes the fact that Maryland school districts are lowering the number of students who will not graduate in this the first year where a high school exit exam must be passed prior to students qualifying for graduation. Students not passing the exit exam twice after receiving required intervention support have the opportunity of completing bridging projects in lieu of passing the test. Some Maryland teachers are reporting that students who have completed the projects are actually scoring well enough afterward to pass the exit exam. A sample of one algebra bridging project can be viewed on the Maryland Department of Education web site.

By comparing the two articles, it appears that we have two different ways of helping students to raise their academic achievement levels. In Maryland they are finding early success, while in Miami the long term effort seems to not have been so successful. What can we learn from the two models?

The first thing that jumps out in my mind is that resources by themselves do not make a difference. There must be other systemic changes in a school for students to make marked improvement. Longer hours and expensive programs by themselves are not the answer. So, what might be the answer? Can Maryland’s experience teach us anything about the teaching and learning process? What can we conclude from the Miami experience as described?

Before answering these questions, I am going to stop my blog here for people to think about and perhaps share their thoughts together. My next blog will get into more of my in depth thoughts about the teaching and learning process. I would highly recommend that if you haven’t read, or read it a long time ago, the February 2008 Educational Leadership magazine on Teaching Students to Think, that you review it for your own learning. It is very interesting and provides us with a lot to discuss.

I hope to have my next blog on this topic completed and posted by the end of next week.

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Cyber Summit June 1-12 Online and Free

I encourage everyone to register and participate as much as possible in the 21st Century Cyber Summit being sponsored by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills office out of Washington, D.C. The URL for registering is:
http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/cybersummit

I hope that we run into each other online during this cyber conference.

I am currently working on my next blog post. I want to thank those of you who are encouraging me to continue writing and posting. It helps to be encouraged. It feels good to know that someone is reading what I have written. I look forward to what I have to say when the post is completed.

Sincerely,

Larry Tash