- Fight for Children's 2014 Quality School Awards [DC Bilingual PCS and Friendship PCS mentioned]
- What’s Lost as Handwriting Fades
- Teaching math without words can boost students' understanding, and their resilience
- Kids Who Spend All Day at School
Fight for Children's 2014 Quality School Awards [DC Bilingual PCS and Friendship PCS mentioned]
The Examiner
By Mark Lerner
June 5, 2014
It is a rare thrill to return to an event that you look forward to attending each year only to find that the organizers have successfully reinvented the program. Yesterday, I joined Fight for Children's Quality Awards luncheon held at the Pavilion Room at the Ronald Reagan Building. The circular meeting place with a vaulted ceiling surrounded by expansive vertical rectangular windows bathes the space in light. Prior to the event a maître d’ commented to me that this is the best hall in the complex.
New this year was the addition of large posters strategically located in the lobby outside of the room, one for each of the award finalists that included pictures of the schools, student demographic information, and scores on the 2013 DC CAS. The boards were a great idea because they provided a natural opportunity for socializing as the representatives from each educational institution gathered in front of their respective display and arriving guests traveled amongst them, stopping to learn more about the schools. It was not an easy job for the staff to have the attendees take their seats for the start of the formal ceremony.
After the welcoming remarks by Fight for Children's president and chief executive officer Michela English, we heard from two rising sophomore students from Bell Multicultural High School. The pupils, Jennifer Meza Castaneda and Miheret Hasenu, were perfectly impressive. They shared both the podium and their presentation as one read a paragraph in Spanish and then the other would follow with a few sentences in English boasting about their opportunity to attend a dual language immersion program. Halfway into their talk the two switched the languages in which they were speaking, never missing a beat.
The chorus from DC Bilingual Public Charter School entertained the crowd during lunch. DC Bilingual is a Public Charter School Board Performance Management Framework Tier 1 school that won one of the Quality School Awards last year. At the conclusion of their lively performance Fight for Children’s board chairman Raul Fernandez greeted the guests with a few remarks.
What came next was fascinating. Mr. Fernandez moderated a conversation between DCPS Chancellor Kaya Henderson and vice chairman of the D.C. PCSB Darren Woodruff. Quality was the central theme of the two panelists’ remarks; with Ms. Henderson describing her efforts to raise the level regarding the teachers, curriculum, and family engagement found in her school system, and Mr. Woodruff pointing out his organization’s desire to accurately measure the performance of charters through the use of the PMF. Ms. Henderson revealed that she has now been with DCPS for seven years and summarized the significant progress that has been made during this period in DC CAS and NAEP standardized test scores, as well as the positive turnaround in the number of students attending the traditional schools.
A most interesting part of the discussion centered on innovations taking place in each school sector. Ms. Henderson spoke about her team’s effort to expand the employment of blended learning. However, she remarked that you have to be deliberate in its implementation. “Some people like to say iPads for all,” commented the Chancellor, “but it’s the same as saying there should be a treadmill for all. This does not mean that it will be utilized effectively.” Mr. Woodruff also spoke about the expansion of blended learning, as well as the popular growth of bilingual and expeditionary learning offerings in the charter schools.
It was then time for the presentations of the awards. Fight for Children board member Gina Adams introduced the four finalists through professionally produced videos providing an overview of each contestant. They were Friendship Public Charter School, Chamberlain Campus; Kelly Miller Middle School; Seaton Elementary School; and Truesdell Education Campus. The Rising Star Award winners, chosen by a ten-member independent selection committee of prominent representatives in the education field, were Friendship PCS and Kelly Miller Middle School. Each school will receive a $100,000 grant over two years to improve the educational outcomes for under-served students in the District of Columbia.
The glossy brochure accompanying the program states that Friendship’s Chamberlain Campus, educating 700 children in grades Pre-school through eighth located in Ward 6, will utilize the grant to increase the English Language Arts proficiency rate of its students by seven percent a year. The staff at Kelly Miller, a Ward 7 school serving more than 300 pupils in grades six through eight, plans to expand its School-Wide Enrichment Model to all of its teachers as a means of increasing academic achievement “among its high-potential, low-income students.”
The afternoon included a who’s who of public education leaders in this town, too numerous to name all of them. So as each of the winning school’s teams excitedly congratulated one another and had their pictures taken in the front of the room, with the sun pouring into the space from those huge windows, it felt, at least for a couple of hours, that all is moving in the right direction for the children of the nation’s capital.
What’s Lost as Handwriting Fades
The New York Times
By Maria Konnikova
June 2, 2014
Does handwriting matter?
Not very much, according to many educators. The Common Core standards, which have been adopted in most states, call for teaching legible writing, but only in kindergarten and first grade. After that, the emphasis quickly shifts to proficiency on the keyboard.
But psychologists and neuroscientists say it is far too soon to declare handwriting a relic of the past. New evidence suggests that the links between handwriting and broader educational development run deep.
Children not only learn to read more quickly when they first learn to write by hand, but they also remain better able to generate ideas and retain information. In other words, it’s not just what we write that matters — but how.
“And it seems that this circuit is contributing in unique ways we didn’t realize,” he continued. “Learning is made easier.”
A 2012 study led by Karin James, a psychologist at Indiana University, lent support to that view. Children who had not yet learned to read and write were presented with a letter or a shape on an index card and asked to reproduce it in one of three ways: trace the image on a page with a dotted outline, draw it on a blank white sheet, or type it on a computer. They were then placed in a brain scanner and shown the image again.
The researchers found that the initial duplication process mattered a great deal. When children had drawn a letter freehand, they exhibited increased activity in three areas of the brain that are activated in adults when they read and write: the left fusiform gyrus, the inferior frontal gyrus and the posterior parietal cortex.
By contrast, children who typed or traced the letter or shape showed no such effect. The activation was significantly weaker.
Dr. James attributes the differences to the messiness inherent in free-form handwriting: Not only must we first plan and execute the action in a way that is not required when we have a traceable outline, but we are also likely to produce a result that is highly variable.
That variability may itself be a learning tool. “When a kid produces a messy letter,” Dr. James said, “that might help him learn it.”
Our brain must understand that each possible iteration of, say, an “a” is the same, no matter how we see it written. Being able to decipher the messiness of each “a” may be more helpful in establishing that eventual representation than seeing the same result repeatedly.
“This is one of the first demonstrations of the brain being changed because of that practice,” Dr. James said.
In another study, Dr. James is comparing children who physically form letters with those who only watch others doing it. Her observations suggest that it is only the actual effort that engages the brain’s motor pathways and delivers the learning benefits of handwriting.
The effect goes well beyond letter recognition. In a study that followed children in grades two through five, Virginia Berninger, a psychologist at the University of Washington, demonstrated that printing, cursive writing, and typing on a keyboard are all associated with distinct and separate brain patterns — and each results in a distinct end product. When the children composed text by hand, they not only consistently produced more words more quickly than they did on a keyboard, but expressed more ideas. And brain imaging in the oldest subjects suggested that the connection between writing and idea generation went even further. When these children were asked to come up with ideas for a composition, the ones with better handwriting exhibited greater neural activation in areas associated with working memory — and increased overall activation in the reading and writing networks.
It now appears that there may even be a difference between printing and cursive writing — a distinction of particular importance as the teaching of cursive disappears in curriculum after curriculum. In dysgraphia, a condition where the ability to write is impaired, usually after brain injury, the deficit can take on a curious form: In some people, cursive writing remains relatively unimpaired, while in others, printing does.
In alexia, or impaired reading ability, some individuals who are unable to process print can still read cursive, and vice versa — suggesting that the two writing modes activate separate brain networks and engage more cognitive resources than would be the case with a single approach.
Dr. Berninger goes so far as to suggest that cursive writing may train self-control ability in a way that other modes of writing do not, and some researchers argue that it may even be a path to treating dyslexia. A 2012 review suggests that cursive may be particularly effective for individuals with developmental dysgraphia — motor-control difficulties in forming letters — and that it may aid in preventing the reversal and inversion of letters.
Cursive or not, the benefits of writing by hand extend beyond childhood. For adults, typing may be a fast and efficient alternative to longhand, but that very efficiency may diminish our ability to process new information. Not only do we learn letters better when we commit them to memory through writing, memory and learning ability in general may benefit.
Two psychologists, Pam A. Mueller of Princeton and Daniel M. Oppenheimer of the University of California, Los Angeles, have reported that in both laboratory settings and real-world classrooms, students learn better when they take notes by hand than when they type on a keyboard. Contrary to earlier studies attributing the difference to the distracting effects of computers, the new research suggests that writing by hand allows the student to process a lecture’s contents and reframe it — a process of reflection and manipulation that can lead to better understanding and memory encoding.
Not every expert is persuaded that the long-term benefits of handwriting are as significant as all that. Still, one such skeptic, the Yale psychologist Paul Bloom, says the new research is, at the very least, thought-provoking.
“With handwriting, the very act of putting it down forces you to focus on what’s important,” he said. He added, after pausing to consider, “Maybe it helps you think better.”
Teaching math without words can boost students' understanding, and their resilience
Greater Greater Education
By Natalie Wexler
June 4, 2014
Do kids learn math better if you take away the words? DCPS schools that used a wordless computer program last year increased their math test scores at 3 times the rate of other schools.
At first, students confronted with the strictly visual puzzles in the ST Math program often get frustrated. "Where are the words?" they want to know.
But if they manage to stick with it, it seems they not only develop a deeper understanding of math concepts. They also learn the importance of tackling a task over and over again, and the satisfaction of figuring something out for themselves.
ST Math is the brainchild of Matthew Peterson, who grew up so dyslexic that he didn't learn to read until 5th grade. He eventually decided to create wordless math games that would help kids who struggle with language learn math through methods that strengthen their spatial-temporal skills. The "ST" in ST Math stands for spatial-temporal.
Through a process of trial and error, Peterson discovered that the games only worked if kids actually wanted to play them. So he created an animated penguin, named JiJi, who moves across the screen, placidly enduring any number of disasters when kids choose the wrong answer.
The animation also shows kids why the answer they chose was wrong. And when they get the right answer, they're rewarded with a satisfying pinging sound.
The games teach concepts from addition and subtraction to fractions and even algebra, all in visual terms. They work for kids who have language-based learning disabilities, as Peterson did, but they also work for kids who are still learning English or low-income kids with low literacy skills. In fact, it seems, they can work for any kids.
Boosting test scores
MIND Research Institute, the nonprofit that Peterson started to develop the program, has found that ST Math can improve test scores two to three times faster than other curricula. And an independent study found that in a group of Los Angeles elementary schools, ST Math significantly increased the proportion of students scoring proficient or advanced on tests. One formerly low-performing California school credits the program for a dramatic turnaround.
Seventeen years after it was first introduced, over half a million students across the country are now using the software. About 2,000 elementary schools have adopted the program, and MIND Research plans to expand it to go up through high school.
During the first year of ST Math in DC, 2012-13, schools that consistently used the program increased their proficiency rates on DC's standardized tests by an average of 17 points. Schools that didn't use the program at all saw their scores rise by an average of 4.5 points.
Funding for the first year of the program in DC came through a partnership between MIND Research, DCPS, and private donors that included Hyundai Motor America and Wells Fargo. That funding covered start-up costs for ST Math for grades 3 through 5 at 31 DCPS schools, about $40,000 per school, according to a DCPS spokesperson. Schools then must pay an annual renewal fee of $3,500, she said.
Another 14 DCPS schools have begun using the program this year, along with 4 charters. MIND Research is sharing their start-up costs and trying to find philanthropic partners to help out.
Leckie Elementary
DCPS's Leckie Elementary, a high-poverty DCPS school in Ward 8, used ST Math with its 3rd-through-5th-graders last year. Its math scores on DC's standardized tests went up by over 20 points, to 60% proficient or advanced.
Jerriel Hall, who teaches 3rd grade at Leckie, says that ST Math wasn't the only reason for that growth. But the school was pleased enough with the program that it decided to begin it in 1st grade this year. DCPS as a whole is planning to extend the program downward to the kindergarten level over a period of 3 years.
Students at Leckie go to the computer lab twice a week for 45 minutes of ST Math, under the supervision of a teacher. In addition, they can opt to use it in class every day for a shorter period of time, although they can also choose to work with other programs. "Most of them choose ST Math," says Hall.
MIND Research provides in-person training when the program is launched at a school, and teachers have access to online webinars on specific topics throughout the year. Still, teachers may find it tough to deal with students confronted with a new way of learning math.
"The first 4 weeks were a nightmare," says Hall. "They're frustrated, they don't get it. There were tears. They're 8, 9 years old, and their worlds were crushed."
But Hall, now in his second year of implementing the program, says that teachers can instill in kids the confidence that will enable them to be successful. Students can use small concrete objects, called manipulatives, to help them grasp concepts, along with old-fashioned paper and pencils.
Eventually, says Hall, "it's like a light bulb comes on: 'I can do this!'"
Even so, not all kids at Leckie are using ST Math. Hall says the students who struggle more with math concepts are learning math in a more traditional way, with more teacher guidance.
And MIND Research's figures showing a dramatic increase in test scores at DCPS schools last year were based on results from only about a quarter of the classes that used the program. Overall, 92 different grades started the program, but 26 of those weren't included in the results, either because the schools were considered high-performing or because fewer than 85% of eligible students were enrolled in ST Math.
That left 66 grades. But 45 of those weren't included in the results because they completed less than 50% of the program. That suggests that about two-thirds of those grades encountered problems in implementation, although MIND Research says that proportion is "not surprising for the first year of a new program."
Frustration is part of the process
Peterson says he deliberately designed ST Math to be frustrating. The goal is not just to get kids to score well on standardized tests. Nor is it even just to give them a visceral understanding of how math works, important as that is. It's also to build those qualities that have been shown to be crucial to success: resilience and perseverance.
Hall says he's seen that happen at Leckie. Compared to the beginning of the school year, he says, students now have "greater stamina when it comes to problem-solving. They're more resourceful, they'll get less frustrated. They'll go find things on their own."
But why do students who use ST Math do better on standardized tests, which re-introduce words into the equation, so to speak?
One reason, Peterson speculates, is the increased resilience students acquire through using ST Math. Another possibility is that students actually become more verbal as a result of playing the games, because they want to talk to each other about what they're doing. In addition, teachers are trained to connect the wordless games to conventional math language.
Having tried a couple of the games, I can vouch for the fact that they're both frustrating and addictive. And figuring out the right answer after starting from a place of total confusion is immensely satisfying.
You can try one yourself at the MIND Research Institute website. But be forewarned: don't start playing if you only have a few minutes before an important appointment, because you just might end up missing it.
Kids Who Spend All Day at School
The Atlantic
By Liz Riggs
May 30, 2014
When Nashville Classical kindergarteners are getting off of the bus, their peers across town have been home for hours. An eight-hour school day for kindergarten may sound excessive, but at this public charter school, that’s how long the school day needs to be.
“I think it’s important to think about all of the things you want to accomplish in a school day, and then make sure that you have the time to accomplish all of those things,” Charlie Friedman, Nashville Classical’s school director, says. “We didn’t start by saying we have to have an extended day, and we didn’t start by saying we have to end at 4:00 p.m.”
When Friedman built the schedule for his school, he knew he wanted to offer recess, physical education, three hours of literacy, hands-on science, and a foreign language every single day.
“Our students are learning Spanish while other kids in the community are walking home from school,” he says. “Once we had all of those things laid out, we built a day that was about an hour longer than the average school day.”
Extended school days, or extended learning time, have become ubiquitous among charter schools and lower-performing schools looking to improve academic achievement. The average school day in the United States varies from state to state, but most stays require approximately 180 days for the school year to be complete. Each state’s Department of Education determines its own minimum school day length and stipulations for fulfilling the 180 days. The way states add this time up can get complicated, but typically if schools or districts choose to add time to the legal minimum school day, the day would be considered extended. For most states, 180 days of school adds up to somewhere between approximately 900 and 1200 hours of instruction per year, which is actually relatively high on a global scale. Even Finland, whose test scores consistently top international rankings, doesn’t have compulsory schooling until age seven, and their school day is shorter than a typical American day.
Still, given the wide socioeconomic gaps and educational disparities across the United States, many schools, charter networks, and districts have turned to extended learning time as a pragmatic reform. States like Massachusetts have spearheaded pilot programs for longer school days and have seen strong results. In 2013, D.C. Public Schools implemented extended hours for eight of its struggling schools and saw some of its largest gains in math and reading since 2008.
Although many disadvantaged schools are considering a longer day, there are a lot of unanswered questions: How does this affect students? How can districts cover the increased costs? And perhaps most importantly, does this extra time in the classroom actually make low-income students more competitive with their peers?
The teachers I spoke with said extended school days can work, but only if the extra time is used effectively. If the hours at school seem wasted, students, families, and teachers don’t get invested—their buy-in is crucial.
Peter Smith* directs a Philadelphia high school that extends its day—but only by a half an hour for students. Hours run from 8:00 a.m. to 3:17 p.m. After school, teachers are required to stay for office hours from 3:17 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. While teachers are in school for an hour and 15 minutes longer than other teachers in the district, they actually teach less than they would in a traditional public school.
“Teachers are totally on board,” Smith says. “Teachers love having that designated time [after school] to be with students, and it does free up their time during the other parts of the school day, and parents love it—especially at the high school level.”
Extended school days can also provide structured planning time for teachers. Without this built-in time, teachers end up working additional hours after school and on the weekends, clocking in as much time as they would if the day were extended—if not more.
Andrew Davis* was a teacher at a charter school in Memphis that extended its day. In his original teaching schedule, he was given two hours a day to plan and collaborate with other teachers. “[It] was great,” he says, “but since I taught two grade levels, it was definitely needed anyways.”
His school originally had an academic day that lasted from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and students would stay late if they had extracurricular activities. Davis would arrive early and stay late to coach cross-country, typically clocking in a 13- or 14-hour day.
“It was exhausting,” he says of those first two years. But, the school was “able to offer longer class periods, build in restroom breaks and student celebrations, and provide teachers with time for meetings and planning time inside the school day so that we had less out-of-school-time meetings.”
Despite being able to provide extra time for teacher planning and class periods, the 10-and-a-half-hour day wore on both teachers and students, creating teacher burnout and student behavior issues. Since then, the school day has been shortened and now ends at 4:00 p.m. “When we shifted to the shorter school day, along with other changes, we saw much more positive student response to the school and a greater school culture with less behavior issues in the school,” he says.
Davis stresses that longer than eight hours of mandatory schooling is overwhelming both for students and teachers. But building extra time into the school day for non-academic purposes—like student interventions, character development, and enrichment activities—can be productive for students.
“I think there can be benefits to an extended school day, but most of them do not come in the form of academic achievement,” says Natalie Jackson*, a teacher from Indiana who works in a charter with lengthened hours. “The extended school day allows us to be more flexible to build in additional opportunities with our students, which ideally invests them in school and builds their character without missing too much class time.”
Besides, some say the school day is an outdated relic, anyway—with ever-more testing requirements and a yawning achievement gap between rich kids and poor kids, now seems like a great time to experiment with classroom hours.