One of the many problems with #SpringValleyHigh

Do you remember what it felt like to be a kid and be scared? My guess is that almost anyone can put themselves back in the position of anxiety when you know you are in trouble and you are not sure what is going to happen next. Not only can we go there in our mind’s eye, we can look at the recent video of a South Carolina student being confronted by a police officer and see what it looks like. Clearly, this young girl is not moving because she is scared. She doesn’t know what will happen next if she gets up and goes with this officer. We have all been there — frozen with fear. What happens next can make all the difference.
To be sure, police officers have a difficult job. And, most certainly, teachers have a difficult job. I fully support the work that both police officers and teachers do every single day. But, what we saw on that video was unacceptable and it makes me wonder about how we think about children in our society and why we are so violent.
I have watched that video several times. Having been a teacher I keep trying to imagine what situation might warrant having one of my students forcibly removed from my classroom. Certainly, if I had a student who was being disruptive and causing harm to others, that would be a reason to have a student removed. However, this girl was just sitting. She did not seem to be causing a problem.
Ok, so benefit of the doubt — let’s say what we don’t see is that 10 minutes prior she was causing a major disruption in the classroom and the teacher called the officer to remove her.
Still, when he gets there and asks her to leave she remains in her seat. She is not being belligerent, raising her arms, or getting in the officer’s face. She is just sitting there. That tells me that she knows she is in trouble and she does not want to get up because she is scared. I wonder what would have happened if the officer made a less violent choice.
What would have happened if he leaned down and said to her quietly, “Look, your teacher called me down because you have been disruptive. Let’s go outside and talk about what is going on.”?
OK, devil’s advocate — the officer makes the quiet request and she disrespectfully tells him what to do with himself. Mind you, I am just making up scenarios — we have no idea what was said. But, just say she is raising the stakes with this officer. What if instead of flipping her desk he tells her he is going to hang out in the room or in the hall until class is over so they can discuss her behavior and deal with whatever consequences are warranted?
As teachers and police officers and parents and citizens we have to remember that these are children. They are still developing cognitively and emotionally. They are still figuring out how to navigate the world. And, based on recent history, you can imagine why a young black female might be scared of a police officer. As the camera pans the room the body language of the other students tell a similar story. These kids are terrified. What can we do to help children as they develop? And, what can we do to support our most important public servants – police officer and teachers in learning how to deal with situations with care instead of violence?
A wise person told me once that almost everything can wait to be dealt with. Of course, there are emergencies that need immediate attention. Those are some of the times we absolutely need the police to jump into action. But, a girl at a desk refusing to get up — that seems like it could have waited.

The official publicity for one of our Grads!

News from The College of New Jersey

For more information contact: Emily Dodd, 609-771-3066, colrel2@tcnj.edu

Brigantine Resident to be Published in a Journal of the National Council of Teachers of English

TCNJ, Atlantic City H.S. Alumna Jessica (Kerley) Gaeckle

EWING, NJ (01/26/2012)(readMedia)– How do you kill a chicken?

Jessica (Kerley) Gaeckle ’10, of Brigantine, learned how one day while taking notes during a student teaching experience, when a special education student in the inclusive classroom raised his hand to talk about watching his grandfather in Puerto Rico prepare a chicken for his Abuela to cook. The anecdote related to a story being read aloud.

“That started a domino effect of all the kids raising their hands and knowing something similar. Myself, my co-teacher and (my supervisor) Dr. Sarah Kern were in awe,” recalled Gaeckle.

Gaeckle may not find knowledge about chicken-killing useful in her personal life, but after her student teaching experience, she now says she believes that knowledge like this is important in the classroom – if her students care, so does she. This experience spurred her to write an essay that is now set to be published in a national education journal.

The recent alum’s essay, titled “How to kill a chicken: Valuing local knowledge in a second grade ESL/sheltered classroom,” will be published in the May 2012 issue of Talking Points, a journal for researchers, teachers, and parents.

“Her paper highlights the importance of honoring and using the lived experiences of your students as a way to engage them in academics and support their success,” said Assistant Professor of Elementary and Early Childhood Education and Coordinator of the Urban Education Master’s program Tabitha Dell’Angelo.

Gaeckle’s essay was based on an independent study in a second grade classroom in Atlantic City that she took on as graduate-level student during spring 2010. According to Dell’Angelo, Gaeckle’s former advisor and professor, Gaeckle kept a journal of her experiences while she was teaching in an attempt to learn the “needs, strengths, and challenges” of the second-graders.

The first graduate in the urban option of the College’s elementary and early childhood education program, Gaeckle completed the 5-year master’s program headed by Dell’Angelo in December 2010. She said she chose the Atlantic City school, Sovereign Avenue School, because she went to high school in the same district.

“My experiences at Atlantic City High School attracted me to the urban option. … I wanted to inspire the kids of an inner city district to have the same drive and love of learning that I had and still have,” she said.

Gaeckle, who now teaches English as a Second Language in kindergarten through second grade in Pleasantville, NJ, hopes that educators will take the lessons in her essay to heart.

“I hope the essay helps teachers, new and novice, to slow down and get to know their students, more than they already do,” she said. “Knowing about students on the surface does not even begin to say you know them deep down…When a student can write an essay or story based on personal experience or something they are knowledgeable and excited about, they put their heart and soul into it!”

Talking Points is a journal published by the Whole Language Umbrella (WLU), a conference of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). The journal helps promote literacy research and the use of “whole language instruction” – a method of teaching children to read by emphasizing the meanings of words in context – in classrooms.

It also provides a forum for parents, classroom teachers, and researchers to reflect on literacy and learning.

The NCTE is dedicated to improving the teaching and learning of English and the language arts. The WLU specifically serves whole language support groups and individual professionals interested in developing and implementing whole language instruction in educational institutions.

According to Dell’Angelo, the publication of Gaeckle’s teaching philosophy will help her make an even bigger difference as a teacher.

“It enables her to contribute to the larger conversation about schooling and education,” she said. “We know that teachers impact the students in their classrooms. However, by publishing (her) work, she is able to make a broader impact.”

Permalink: http://readme.readmedia.com/Brigantine-Resident-to-be-Published-in-a-Journal-of-the-National-Council-of-Teachers-of-English/3389018

Teacher bullying: Maladaptive coping, not discipline

When I was a little girl I remember hearing a public service announcement on the radio, “if you or someone you know is being abused, please call…”. I might have been 9 or 10 years old but that made a big impact. It felt like power to protect myself or others – I had someone to call. In general, children have very little power. They must do whatever the adults around them tell them to do. This lack of power exists at home and at school. Children are at the whim of adults, expected to trust that their best interests are being considered. Parents send their children to school and trust that the adults caring for their children deserve that trust.

There has been a lot of attention to the issue of bullying over the past decade. The rhetoric surrounding bullying is focused on child-to-child bullying. We teach students social skills, about what it means to be a bystander, and how to stand up for their rights. However, what do students do when the bully is an adult? There exists a problem of bullying in schools that is perpetrated by teachers. Teacher bullying raises a few important issues, the protection of children, supporting adaptive coping in teachers, and honoring schools as a physically and emotionally safe space for everyone who spends time in them. I truly believe that the large majority of teachers are not bullies and do not use these maladaptive tactics. But, even the few who do need our support to learn better skills — or, they need to go.

So, what constitutes being a bully? Bullying includes name calling or teasing (verbal), intentionally leaving others out of activities (social), hitting or other intentional physical harm (physical). Many action that teachers consider to be “discipline” can be considered bullying. If one particular student called out constantly or if students in the classroom are used as negative examples, it could be considered verbal bullying. When a teacher decides that one student can’t participate in recess, a special, or the “pizza party” they are being socially ostracized. And, although it seems obvious that physical punishment should not be used, frustrated teachers may choose to physically push, pull, or otherwise move a student. To be sure, many of the actions that are accepted as discipline need to be looked at more closely.

An important consideration is to understand why this happens. Bullies are trying to fulfill some kind of need with their bullying.  Often, bullying provides the bully a sense of power and control. One must wonder if teachers are feeling so powerless in their jobs or personal lives that in order to fill this need they enact violence on children.

These abusive disciplinary tactics become an accepted part of some teachers’ repertoire because they are not told that it is inappropriate. What’s worse, in low-resource communities dominated by Black and Latino students there is an assumption that it is culturally appropriate to discipline harshly. I’ve heard teachers say, “this is all they [students] understand”. Then, of course, we punish children for using these same strategies.

When I was a little girl I felt validated by hearing on the radio that hitting was wrong and that I could call someone for help. That message let me know that even if someone told me I deserved to be hit or ridiculed, it was not OK. Children today need adults to stand up for their rights. They need adults to support one another’s ability to cope with stress and feelings of powerlessness in adaptive ways that do not include the verbal, social, or physical abuse of children.

Jessica Gaeckle gets published!

When Jessica [Kerley] Gaeckle was working on her Independent Study during student teaching she probably didn’t imagine it would be published two years later. Her article,  “How to kill a chicken: Valuing local knowledge in a second grade ESL/sheltered classroom” will be published in the May 2012 issue of Talking Points. This journal is published by WLU, the Whole Language Umbrelltalking points covera, a conference of NCTE. Talking Points helps promote literacy research and the use of whole language instruction in classrooms. It provides a forum for parents, classroom teachers, and researchers to reflect about literacy and learning.

Congratulations to Jessica, our first Urban Education graduate. She makes us proud every day as a teacher and now she is extending her impact by sharing her scholarship.

Education Funding Flexibility Bill Clears House Committee

By Alyson Klein on July 13, 2011

State and district officials would get broad leeway to shift federal dollars now aimed at particular populations—such as children in poverty—to other programs, under a measure approved today by the House Education and the Workforce Committee.

Republicans say the measure, part of a move to begin reauthorizing the ESEA piecemeal, would make it easier for districts and states to direct federal money to where it is needed most, which they see as a must in tough economic times.

Democrats argue that the Republicans are proposing too much leeway, and that it would allow districts and states to ignore the students most at risk—poor and minority kids—and trample on students’ civil rights.

The measure, approved along party lines in the committee, would allow states and districts to take money out of an array of programs governed by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—including Title I grants for disadvantaged children—and direct the money to other purposes that they believe will do the most to improve student achievement.

For instance, districts could move all of the money out of Title I and direct it to teacher training. Districts could also transfer funding into a program aimed at innovation, which allows for a broad range of activities, from pre-kindergarten to adult education. School districts would still be subject to program reporting and accountability requirements. More background on the bill from the committee here and from Politics K-12 here.

Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the chairman of the House education committee and the sponsor of the bill, said the measure would help school districts and states direct dollars to the most effective programs.

“Time and time again, school officials have talked about the innovative reforms they would undertake if only they had the flexibility to target federal funds according to their priorities,” he said.

But Rep. George Miller of California, the top Democrat on the committee, argued that the measure would create “a slush fund that would allow [districts and states] to ignore the needs of poor and minority students. … This legislation would allow school districts to siphon away money specifically intended for these students and instead use that targeted funding for nearly any other activity” allowed under ESEA.

To assuage those concerns, Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., introduced an amendment to make clear that nothing in the legislation would conflict with existing civil rights or accountability requirements.

“Providing additional flexibility in the use of federal funds will not harm any subgroup of students,” he argued. “Instead, we expect all students—regardless of race and ethnicity or socioeconomic status—will benefit from the increased opportunities this legislation provides school districts and state officials.”

Thompson also contended that Democrats, in voting against the legislation, were failing to trust local education officials to make the best decisions for students in their districts.

Democrats were unconvinced.

Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., worried that federal funds meant for disadvantaged students and racial minorities would ultimately go to other students whose families are more likely to be able to put political pressure on local education leaders.

“Where do you think that money will go?” he asked. “If you leave it to the market, the privileged will get more. We have serious divisions in our society, we have serious inequalities in our society, it is incumbent on us to do everything we can to address those.”

Democrats also countered that the bill does nothing to address the sort of flexibility that they say districts and states are really asking for, such as allowing districts to keep funds they must now set aside for school choice and tutoring.

Democrats introduced a series of amendments to exempt particular pots of money from the proposed flexibility. For instance, an amendment by Miller would have prohibited districts from moving money out of Title I and diverting it to other purposes. Other amendments sought to protect funding for English-language learners, neglected and delinquent children, migrant students, American Indians, and Alaska Native and Hawaiian children. All were defeated on party-line votes.

Holt introduced an amendment that would require school districts that access the funds to explain how they are serving particular populations. Kline said there was already a similar requirement in the legislation.

The flexibility bill was the third in a series of smaller, more targeted measures aimed at reauthorizing parts of the ESEA. (Check here for information on the first two bills—a bipartisan charter school bill and a GOP-backed measure to eliminate programs deemed unnecessary.)

It’s an open question whether the next two pieces of legislation the committee has planned—one dealing with teachers and another with accountability—will garner bipartisan support. But if the reauthorization of the ESEA is going to happen this year, Republicans and Democrats will need to come to agreement sooner or later.

Parents’ perspective on school reform

Reformers, please listen to what parents want for schools

Philadelphia (CNN) — Many of those who are driving education policy today are fixed on a certain set of numbers and measurements that we’re told are the way to gauge a quality school. But as a parent, that’s not really what matters to me about my daughter’s education.

I can’t tell you the number of her standardized test score from last year. I can’t tell you the name of the curriculum program her school uses for math and reading. I don’t know the pay scale of each of her teachers and whether that contributes to their malaise or enthusiasm in the classroom.

But here’s what I can tell you about my daughter’s education.

I can tell you the name of the history teacher who inspired her this year, the book that she loved and couldn’t stop talking about and the topic of the reflective essay she labored to write and rewrite.

I can tell you which teachers gave homework assignments that made some of our family evenings perfectly miserable and the community service projects that had our whole family out cleaning the streets or readying a garden.

I can tell you what it felt like when the principal of a school shrugged her shoulders after I complained my daughter had been pushed down the stairs (we left that school) and what it felt like when the new principal stood outside greeting children by name as they entered every morning.

I can tell you that my mother cried when my youngest daughter’s school choir sang “Arirang,” a traditional Korean song, and that I loved every squeak and clank of the school orchestra.

I can tell you all of these things because as a parent, the true meaning of a quality school lies in a strong child- and family-centered educational mission that recognizes education as a “process of living” and school life as “real and vital” to our children and families, as American philosopher John Dewey wrote more than half a century ago.

This is what matters to me, but it’s apparently not a priority when it comes to national debates about education reform. For many parents, the elements of what makes a quality school seem completely at odds with the national buzz about education reform:

— While parents talk about programs rich in the arts, sciences and history, politicians talk about covering the basics through a one-size-fits-all curricula.

— While we talk about building critical thinkers and creative problem-solvers for a complicated and dynamic world, they talk about hiring billion-dollar testing companies that infiltrate every aspect of teaching and learning, drilling the notion of knowledge down to a single test score.

— While we talk about smaller class sizes to help students and teachers build nurturing relationships with one another, they talk about maximizing capacity and “creating efficiencies.”

— While we talk about building an experienced, stable and professional teaching force where teachers are prepared with a depth of knowledge in their subject areas and are committed to the profession, others talk about relying on a temporary teaching force or focusing on education managers.

— While we talk about sustainable change based upon policies that have been proved to work, politicians and the private sector demand dramatic and disruptive changes that do little to significantly improve children’s educational experiences.

And in this lies the critical difference between what many parents see as their hopes for a quality school system and the politicians and billionaire venture philanthropists dominating the education reform landscape. The latter have become so enamored with the structure and management of education that they’ve forgotten about the substance and practice of it.

So if this is what’s meaningful to parents and families, how can policymakers help to support those goals?

They can start by listening to what parents around the country are saying we need our elected officials to do. Parents Across America, a national organization of parents, recently released its own blueprint for school reform.

Among the suggestions: Address the dramatic inequity in resources within and among school districts so we can maintain smaller class sizes and early childhood programs. Create strong, effective support for teachers, provide a rich well-rounded curriculum, and create multiple ways to evaluate teaching and learning. Make parental involvement meaningful and include roles for governance.

In her book “The Next American Revolution,” Detroit activist Grace Lee Boggs decries a system of education that views children as passive receptacles of information that routinely passes as knowledge. Instead, she challenges us to give our children the kind of education that creates tomorrow’s leaders by unleashing their creative energy “to heal the Earth and build durable economies and communities,” “create a vibrant society” and a “democratic citizenry.”

This is the direction our nation should be moving in, with elected leaders working alongside parents and community members to truly transform our schools.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Helen Gym.

Minority students in San Francisco not closing gap with Whites

Low-income and minority students in San Francisco’s public schools are not narrowing the testing and college preparation gap between themselves and other students, despite efforts by the school district, a new study reports.

When compared with districts statewide, the San Francisco Unified School District received a D for the overall performance of minority students, the report said.

“Some districts are performing at a much higher level than others,” said Arun Ramanathan, the executive director of Education Trust–West, the Oakland-based nonprofit that recently released the study.

“Those doing well are in the Central Valley, where there’s a higher level of low income,” Ramanathan said. “Conventional wisdom would say urban districts, which typically get more resources, would do better, but that’s not the case.”

San Francisco Unified, in particular, has some of the largest achievement gaps in the state, he said. The report said San Francisco Unified earned an F for the gaps that separate black and Hispanic students from their white counterparts.

Education Trust–West studied five years of scores from the Academic Performance Index, which is California’s testing standard. The report measured four criteria for low-income and minority students, including absolute test performance, improvement over a five-year period, the achievement gaps compared to their white counterparts and whether low-income and minority students were considered “college-ready” once they graduate from high school.

The report ranked 146 districts in California. Statewide, most districts received a C or D, overall.

Ramanathan said the achievement gap stems largely from a decades-old trend that allocated less money and fewer quality teachers to minority and low-income districts.

Richard Carranza, deputy superintendent with the district, agrees with that assessment. He said the achievement gap is the district’s No. 1 priority and that the report supports the strides the district is attempting to make.

“It absolutely supports what we want to do,” Carranza said. “Historically, these have been communities underserved by district and The City.”

San Francisco Unified has reorganized its administration by offering teachers more professional development opportunities in an attempt to be more focused on historically underperforming schools. The district also is focused on giving students in lower-achieving neighborhoods the ability to attend more diverse schools and participate in new programs by assigning students to schools in different parts of The City, Carranza said.

“San Francisco has some really isolated areas in which students live,” he said. “Through the student assignment, we’ve tried to address that by giving students the chance to attend school in other parts of the city.”

But Carranza said it could take up to five years before changes in the culture and focus of programs produce documentable results.

akoskey@sfexaminer.com

Grading SF’s achievement gap

A look at how the San Francisco Unified School District fared in Education Trust-West’s report card on academic performance:

  • 37,232: Students tested
  • D: Performance for students of color
  • B: Performance of low-income students
  • D: Improvement for students of color
  • C: Improvement for low-income students
  • F: Achievement gaps for black students
  • F: Achievement gaps for Latino students
  • C: College-ready
  • D: Overall grade

Source: Education Trust–West