Parentella

Mr. Franklin and his ideas are a shining example of the direction that education ought be moving in order to bring change to our schools. In this interview he shares his opinions of the educational system, which while shared by many, are not necessarily representative of all other educators. This is part two of an on going series. Read part 1 here.

Q: Your school has undergone an amazing improvement in the API (Academic Performance Index) standardized test scores since you arrived. In fact, the scores improved so much so that Laura Bush came in person to see the school in 2005. What caused the change?

A: The first year that I taught at the school, 1999, our API scores were a dismal 426 out of a possible 900 points. That score put us in the bottom third of state in terms of what our students achieved compared to other schools in the state. Over the next 6 years, our scores steadily improved, some years making jumps as big as 50 points, which is dramatic improvement. In 2005, we had a peak of 616 points. Since then, our scores have remained stable in the low 600’s, and now we rank pretty close to the median.

What I believe caused the higher test scores was primarily an influx of new administrative leadership and the attitude they brought. The District gutted the school of its previous lackluster establishment, and the new people greatly increased morale amongst the teachers and students alike. We were blessed with a new principal who was enthusiastic and energetic.  The new principal fostered a positive, infectious attitude and a sense of pride in the school, which the school had not seen in years. Suddenly, school went from being dull to “cool” for the students.

The teachers were happier and tried harder. The kids were happier and tried harder. I would say the increased scores were probably 50% a result of the attitude change alone. The other factors that led to increased achievement were more tangible. We received more funding, so we were able to lower class sizes and bring in tutors to help the slower kids do well on the tests. Students with comprehension difficulties were assigned to an extra academic class in their area of weakness in lieu of what would have been an elective — but an extra period was added to the day, enabling all students to have an elective. Many students were not allowed to be teacher’s assistants as an elective and instead were made to take “real” elective classes. And, of course, the principal insisted the teachers utilize best practices and academic rigor. We received funding for additional professional development.

In 2006, two things changed. One, the enthusiastic principal was promoted. Two, the District and the State began to relax the scrutiny that had been present during the 2002 intervention. Since then, the scores have stabilized, but haven’t seen the dramatic increases of years past. A combination of lax enforcement of best practices and the withering away of the energy our school had seen has, in my opinion, been the explanation for our flattening out in achievement.

Q: So, do you think the API testing should be eliminated altogether?

A: No, testing serves a specific purpose of evaluating how much students know, in theory, anyway. It can be a useful tool. But you have to remember that students see no reward from the test (results aren’t even available until the next school year) so many do not take it seriously. Colleges have caught on to the fact that testing isn’t necessarily an accurate indicator and have de-emphasized the SAT and GRE.

The problem is the belief that test scores reflect teaching quality, or even what is truly learned, which is actually a symptom of a bigger problem. The bigger problem is a growing  lack of personal responsibility from all stakeholders as a “team.” By this, I’m referring to the “it takes a village” model, where in this case, the village is the stakeholders. Schools must improve, indeed, but great steps must also be taken amongst others in the process. It must be a team effort.

Q: I am not sure I follow you. What do you mean by “personal responsibility” and “stakeholders?”

A: Stakeholders are everyone who is invested in a child’s education, including teachers, school administrators, parents and even extended family.

When kids don’t pay attention in class and/or don’t do their homework, the teacher or school is blamed for the child not being able to comprehend the material. The truth is that even the best teacher in the world will have great difficulty educating someone who is not willing to learn, or does not have the resources available to learn. These resources include parents or guardians or family who have the means to monitor and help, and the ability to provide additional help such as tutoring. Many of the families at my school face tough barriers, including but not limited to: language, work hours that don’t allow parents/guardians to be home when help is needed, area crime and its negative impact on the community, and economic difficulties. Surely a family must feed and tend to safety as a first priority. These barriers, combined with society’s distractions aimed at kids, all contribute to the uphill battle the teachers in my school face in getting through to the kids, and the same is true in many other schools.

Ironically enough, the United States has a higher education system that is the envy of the world, yet our K-12 education ranks amongst the lowest of the industrialized nations. How is that possible? The responsibility issue is a large factor.

In college, it is your responsibility entirely to achieve. If you have a good teacher, great. If you have a bad teacher, it is still up to you to achieve. Think of it as a survival of the fittest model that is not and cannot be implemented in K-12. We can’t just say to kids, “if you don’t graduate from high school, oh well, you’ll pay a price.” For adults we can do this, and clearly it works to motivate students to achieve. For the many reasons mentioned above, K–12 needs to be a more nurturing environment, where students can succeed despite the challenges they face.

Read parts 3, 4 and 5 of the series

———————–

Christi Grab is contributing editor and writer for Parentella. She is a native of Southern California. After graduating from San Diego State University, she went on to be a successful business woman. In April of 2007, she and her husband decided to put their careers on hold and travel the world for two years. Ms. Grab has recently returned from her travels and is currently writing a book about their adventure. For more information on the trip, visit http://kosmos.liveflux.net/blog.

Related posts:

1. Part 1: Teaching to the Test

Tags: Academic Performance Index, education, High school, Higher education, Los Angeles, Los Angeles Unified School District, Standardized test

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 15th, 2009 at 10:59 pm and is filed under Christi Grab, Education Reform, Teacher Perspectives. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.