Primer: Education Issues - Strategies for Improving the Public Schools
Back
to the Table of Contents
There have been numerous proposals to improve the quality of
public school education. The discussion which follows considers only sixteen
of these proposals, beginning with greater community support and understanding
and ending with home schooling.
1. Community Support & Understanding
Research shows that Americans have a somewhat diverse set of attitudes
about the schools. For example, Public Agenda (First Things First, 1994)
reports that raising academic standards in the local schools is supported
by 61% of the public. Some 88% of the public support not allowing students
to graduate from high school without demonstrating writing and English-speaking
competencies. Although raising academic standards would appear to be highly
supported, the public also believes that other more fundamental issues
must be addressed: the problems of safety and order in schools as well
as concerns with the basics.
School improvement efforts face an additional obstacle in that the public
is suspicious of new teaching methods designed to improve achievement.
The gap between what educators and what the public consider best classroom
practice is huge in some cases. Some 86% of the Public Agenda respondents
believed that students should do arithmetic “by hand” before
using calculators, while 82% of math education professionals say that
“early use of calculators will improve childrens’ problem-solving
skills and not prevent the learning of arithmetic.”
Recent research does indicate that second and third grade students in
problem-centered classes scored significantly higher on standardized measures
of computation and understanding than do those students learning mathematics
in a textbook-centered classroom (Wood and Seller, 1996). Similar gaps
between educators and the public exist in approaches to teaching composition,
learning to read, grouping students, and in determining how special needs
students are to be educated.
Public Agenda reports significant public support for changes in the conditions
of learning. Some 92% of the public believe that learning should be enjoyable
and interesting for elementary students while 86% hold similar views for
high school students. The public also exhibits considerable concern (50%)
over crowded classrooms.
Limited public support for many school improvement strategies suggests
that educators have failed to communicate with parents and the public
prior to the implementation of new practices. The gaps cited above
also suggest that the public doubts that educators possess a professional
knowledge base. Only through continuing conversation and joint planning
in our school communities will educators and citizens be able to develop
and implement strategies that are professionally sound and effective with
all children.
2. Changes in Teaching and Learning
A variety of recent school improvement proposals have focused directly
on the quality of work which students are able to do, as well as on what
they know. This dual concern has introduced a new level of complexity
to all aspects of teaching and learning including curriculum, instruction
and assessment. The Wisconsin Center for Education Research has described
these new expectations for teachers and students in terms of “authentic
academic achievement” (Newmann, Marks, and Gamoran, 1995).
The Center, through a five-year research project funded by the U.S. Department
of Education, has defined the nature of authentic work and identified
the school conditions which foster quality work (Newmann and Wehlage,
1995).
Construction of knowledge: Students construct knowledge when they
organize, synthesize, interpret, explain or evaluate information. They
use what others have done, but they also bring some of what they know
and have done to formulate new insights. Traditional learning has emphasized
reproduction or memorizing knowledge and, in some cases, applying algorithms
to a problem which has ready-made or predictable solutions. Authentic
learning (frequently described as hands-on learning) is viewed as an active
mental process in which students are constantly working to make sense
of what they encounter.
Disciplined inquiry: Authentic achievement uses an established
knowledge base that possesses facts, concepts, and theories which are
appropriate to the problem being studied. Such inquiry also requires an
in-depth understanding of the issues involved rather than just a textbook
survey. Finally, students must elaborate their findings in some way --
verbally, symbolically, visually, or in writing.
Value beyond school: Authentic work, in the world and in school,
must have value, i.e., achievement must have aesthetic, utilitarian or
personal value. The condition of authenticity tends to bring out the best
effort and the highest level of quality or achievement.
Research by Newmann and Wehlage (1995) reveals that classroom instruction
also must contain elements of authenticity if student work is to have
significant value. Teachers should engage students in higher order thinking
tasks, help students acquire deep knowledge of a discipline, engage students
in substantive conversation, and make connections to the world beyond
the classroom. Posing substantive problems which possess real-life qualities
(complex, ill-structured, multi-disciplinary, with ethical implications)
tend to challenge students to reach higher levels of school achievement.
The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ reform vision of
school mathematics is an expression of a constructivist or authentic approach
to mathematics. The NCTM expresses its new vision for teaching mathematics
in terms of “shifts” (Assessment Standards for School Mathematics,
1995):
- A shift in the mathematical content that students are expected to
learn; all students need the opportunity to develop an understanding
of algebra, geometry, trigonometry, statistics & probability, rather
than considering arithmetic proficiency as sufficient for most students.
- A shift in the vision of learning mathematics toward investigating,
formulating, reasoning, and applying strategies, and away from memorizing
and repeating.
- A shift in the role of teachers toward “questioning and listening”
and away from telling students what to do.
- A shift in the vision of evaluation toward a system based on evidence
from multiple sources and away from relying on evidence from a single
test.
It is interesting to note that among Wisconsin’s adults, 93%
agree with the statement, “Instead of relying primarily on standardized
multiple choice tests, schools also should test how well students can
apply knowledge by asking them to perform or create, such as writing,
giving a speech, or conducting an experiment (WEAC Poll, July 1996).
3. Improving Instruction in Mathematics and Science
For several years there have been calls for significant reforms in mathematics
and science instruction. These reforms relate primarily to content, instructional
strategies, time allocated to mathematics and science, and opportunity
to learn. Two recent reports are discussed briefly.
(1) A Splintered Vision: An Investigation of U.S. Science and Mathematics
Education
In the Spring, 1997 issue of Wisconsin Teacher of Mathematics
there is an executive summary of a report entitled, “A Splintered
Vision: An Investigation of U.S. Science and Mathematics Education.”
This report, which is primarily a critique of the content
of U. S. science and mathematics, concludes that there is no one at the
“helm” of mathematics and science education in the United States.
As a result, it is argued, there is no single, coherent vision of what
should be taught to children in the areas of mathematics and science.
Selected comments from the executive summary follow:
- “These splintered visions produce unfocused curricula and textbooks
that fail to define clearly what is intended to be taught. They influence
teachers to implement diffuse learning goals in their classrooms. They
emphasize familiarity with many topics rather than concentrated attention
to a few.
- “Our curricula, textbooks, and teaching all are a ?mile wide
and an inch deep’” (p. 4).
- “Mathematics curricula in the U.S. consistently cover far more
topics than is typical in other countries”.
- “U. S. curricula in mathematics and science seek to do something
of everything and less of any one thing. Given roughly comparable amounts
of instructional time, this topic diversity limits the average amount
of time allocated to any one topic” (p. 5).
- “Teachers in the U.S. are sent into their classrooms with a
mandate to implement inclusive, fragmented curricula and armed with
textbooks that embody the same ?breadth rather than depth’ approach”.
- !“Our data show that they (U.S. mathematics and science teachers)
are scheduled to work about 30 periods each week, which is more than
teachers in Germany (just over 20 periods) and Japan (fewer than 20)
- The authors of the report call for science and mathematics education
which is more focused (on central ideas and capacities). In addition,
they recommend more instructional depth in selected areas so that the
content is more meaningful, more organized, linked to a child’s
other ideas, and has the capability of producing insight and intuition,
rather than rote performance. In addition, there is a call for rigorous
and “powerful” content, which is likely to produce learning
that lasts and not just learning that suffices for the demands of schooling.
(2). The Status of Science and Mathematics Teaching in the United
States
An article in the June, 1997 issue of the National Institute for
Science Education (NISE Brief) is critical of U. S. mathematics
and science instruction when judged against the reform proposals made
by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the National Science
Education Standards.
Among the recommended reforms are the following:
- Emphasize high expectations for all students.
- Focus on in-depth learning of a limited number of powerful concepts,
emphasizing understanding, reasoning, and problem-solving rather than
memorization of facts, terminology, and algorithms.
- Integrate scientific and mathematical inquiry with knowledge of science
and mathematics concepts and principles.
- Engage students in meaningful activities that enable them to construct
and apply their knowledge of key science and mathematics concepts.
- Develop in students the scientific and mathematical literacy necessary
to make informed decisions and to function as full participants in society.
- Ensure that teachers have a deep understanding of their subject matter.
Selected findings from the study follow:
Not enough time is spent on science instruction (and to a lesser degree,
on mathematics). On average each day, elementary school students receive
30 minutes of science instruction, compared with 70 minutes in reading
and language arts. Mathematics was approximately 50 minutes. At the secondary
level, most science and mathematics classes meet for approximately 50
minutes each day (as with other subjects). However, because most students
do not take four years of science and mathematics, they receive far less
instruction in these areas than in English/language arts.
Objectives of Science and Mathematics: Analysis of instruction shows
that a sizable proportion of teachers spend time on activities which run
counter to current reform recommendations. “For example, approximately
40 percent of mathematics classes and approximately 20 percent of science
classes give heavy emphasis to preparing students for standardized tests,
which have been shown to focus on lower level knowledge and skills”.
“While the national standards advocate engaging students in the
construction of new understanding through hands-on/manipulative activities,
such instruction constitutes roughly one-fourth of the time in early grades,
and drops steadily as students move to upper grades” (p. 3). Further,
lecture and textbook methodologies continue to dominate science and mathematics
instruction.
Equal Opportunities for All Students: Ability grouping is widely used
in many schools (especially at the secondary level) with 34% of schools
assigning students to science courses by ability and 57% of schools doing
the same in mathematics. This is an important issue because students in
the “low ability” classes are more likely to experience instructional
practices which run counter to current reform proposals. For example,
low ability science classes were more likely to spend time reading from
the textbook than high ability classes, and doing worksheet problems,
while spending less time on hands-on activities.
4. Educational Standards
Many believe that one way to reform education is to develop and articulate
educational standards across all subjects and grade levels. In addition,
they believe that there must be well-designed assessment systems which
can measure the extent to which students are meeting the standards.
While some have called for national standards and assessments, others
believe that this responsibility should be left to the states or local
school districts. A majority (59%) of Wisconsin’s citizens believe
that standards should be established at the local level. Only 8% favor
federal standards, compared with 27% who said the state should establish
educational standards (WEAC Poll, July 1996).
In addition to the efforts undertaken by various government jurisdictions,
much work has been done by state and national subject matter organizations
which have defined what students should know and be able to do. For example,
the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics published its curriculum
and evaluation standards for mathematics in 1989.
The idea of establishing educational standards to improve learning is
not new. Educators believe that student achievement is enhanced when certain
conditions are met: the curriculum and instruction are designed to teach
a specified content and skills; students, teachers, and parents understand
what students are expected to know and to be able to do; and assessments
are implemented to measure how well students have mastered the content
and skills. What is new is the use of the word standards to define what
students should know and be able to do. Previously, terms such as objectives,
outcomes, learner expectations, and competencies were used.
In the debate about standards, several important questions need to be
answered: What form should the standards take? What should be the balance
between skill- and content-based standards? How specific should they be?
Who should create the standards? How should the standards be implemented
and assessed?
The state of Wisconsin, under the direction of the DPI and Lieutenant
Governor, has established educational standards at selected grade levels
(4, 8, and 10) in a variety of subject areas, including science, mathematics,
social studies, and English-language arts. Ultimately, there is to be
a state assessment program which will measure how well students have mastered
the standards in four core subject areas: reading/language arts, mathematics,
science, and social studies. This program also will include a state graduation
test which students will be required to pass in order to graduate from
a public high school in Wisconsin. A complete set of the standards can
be found at the current Internet address:http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/standards/index.html
5. Integrating The Curriculum
Curriculum integration is one of several reforms designed to enhance
the quality of student learning. It is a form of teaching and learning
which draws upon the knowledge and skills of a variety of content areas
as they become necessary in problem-solving. It is argued that such a
strategy more adequately reflects real-world problem-solving than does
textbook-based instruction. The logic is sound, for few problems that
students will confront in their adult lives are contained by a single
discipline. Most cut across a variety of disciplines and may require ethical
considerations before a solution can be selected.
Most of Wisconsin’s citizens, more than 80%, also support the idea
of integrating instruction across subject areas in order to improve student
achievement (WEAC Poll, July, 1996).
Curriculum integration presents a variety of implementation challenges.
According to David Elkind (1994), elementary teachers have the advantage
of being prepared in a variety of disciplines. In contrast to middle level
and secondary teachers, they routinely work in a variety of disciplines
and feel comfortable doing so.
Ross and Olsen (1993) offer five models of implementation which might
be used at the middle and high school levels. Each provides a foundation
for the next model.
1. Single Subject Integration: presents the content of one curriculum
subject as it appears in real life and requires students to solve a real
problem.
2. The Coordinated Model: two or more teachers teach integrated
single subjects to the same students but do so cooperatively.
3. The Integrated Core Model: one teacher remains with students
for two or three periods. A teacher might teach language arts in the context
of science or social studies as the “core” around which the
rest of the school day is planned.
4. The Integrated Double Core Model: two teachers teach the same
students within two integrated cores. One might teach math skills in the
context of science, while another teaches language skills within a social
studies context.
5. The self-contained core model: one teacher with multiple credentials
teaches one group of students all day within a single meaningful context.
6. The Core Curriculum
Many schools throughout the country have adopted a curriculum based on
the ideas of E. D. Hirsch and the Core Knowledge Foundation. Hirsch
argues that every American needs to possess certain basic information
in order to thrive in the modern world. This, he maintains, is the process
of becoming culturally literate.
Advocates of the Core Knowledge Sequence emphasize that their curriculum
is not a list of facts to be memorized. “Rather, it is a guide to
coherent content from grade to grade, designed to encourage steady academic
progress as children build their knowledge and skills from one year to
the next” (Internet: Core Knowledge Home Page).
Hirsch is especially critical of “cafeteria-style” education,
which he feels has resulted in a steady decline in the level of commonly
shared knowledge across generations. He believes that the consequence
is a lack of shared knowledge across and within schools and is a recipe
for cultural fragmentation.
Hirsch also believes that cultural literacy constitutes the only sure
avenue of opportunity for disadvantaged children, and that only by piling
up specific, communally shared information can children learn to participate
in complex cooperative activities with other members of their community.
In summary, Hirsch maintains that we need to have a system of curriculum,
instruction, and assessment which is linked to a well-defined set of core
ideas, including names, dates, events, concepts, and vocabulary.
In 1996, Verona, Wisconsin opened a charter school called the Core Knowledge
Charter School. It is based on the core knowledge/cultural literacy concepts
of E. D. Hirsch, and emphasizes direct teacher instruction (as opposed
to “hands-on” or “activity-driven” instruction).
7. Character Education
Educators always have tried to have a positive influence on the values,
habits, and behaviors of students. Horace Mann and others who supported
the concept of the common school believed that character development and
citizenship were two of the most important objectives of public education.
Cunningham (1996) notes that character education often has been a euphemism
for “proper behavior” and used as a cover by some groups to
control and direct the behavior of others. As a consequence, there has
been a long-standing debate between those who want the public schools
to focus primarily on the teaching of academics and those who have argued
that education must do more than teach subject matter content or skill
development.
Although character education (often referred to as teaching of values)
has always been part of the American system of education, support declined
during the latter half of the 20th Century.
One explanation for this decline is offered by Lickona (1993). “In
the 1960’s, a worldwide rise in personalism celebrated the worth,
autonomy, and subjectivity of the person, emphasizing individual rights
and freedom over responsibility. Personalism rightly protested societal
oppression and injustice, but it also delegitimized moral authority, eroded
belief in objective moral norms, turned people inward toward self-fulfillment,
weakened social commitments (for example, to marriage and parenting),
and fueled the socially destabilizing sexual revolution”.
Lickona also argues that the pluralism of American society was an additional
factor contributing to the decline in support for character education.
Because of the diversity within this society, debate often has focused
on whose values to teach. Others have expressed concern about the separation
of church and state and believe that any attempts to teach values or morality
will introduce religion into the classroom.
Although concerns regarding which values to teach may arise, the debate
appears to be far less controversial than some would believe. In a
statewide poll of Wisconsin adults conducted by WEAC in July, 1996, 91%
thought that schools should emphasize “character education,”
in which students are taught values such as respect for others, personal
responsibility, and citizenship.
Two and one-half years earlier, in January, 1994, a statewide sample
of adults in Wisconsin was asked if they thought it was possible to get
people in their community to agree on a basic set of values that should
be taught in their public schools. Only two-thirds of respondents thought
this goal was possible. However, when asked if specific values should
be taught, there was a near consensus for most of the values listed below:
| |
| Value | Percent Agreeing |
| Personal responsibility | 97% |
| Strong Work Ethic | 96% |
| Honesty | 96% |
| Democracy | 95% |
| Acceptance of people of different races and ethnic backgrounds | 95% |
| Love of Country | 91% |
| Acceptance of people who hold different religious beliefs | 90% |
| Moral courage | 89% |
| The golden rule | 84% |
| Acceptance of people who hold unpopular or controversial
political or social views | 76% |
| Acceptance of people with different sexual orientations | 55% |
| Fundamental Christian Teachings | 27% |
Others also maintain that there is widespread agreement within this country
regarding what constitutes the core values of character education. In
an interview published in Educational Leadership in 1993 (Berreth
and Scherer), Amatai Etzioni argues that the question regarding whose
values to teach is not a strong counter-argument to character education.
He states:
“But the fact is that there are lots of values we all share. Nobody
argues that discrimination is morally appropriate. A lot of people, unfortunately,
engage in it. Nobody argues that lying is better than truth-telling. Philosophers
might argue the margin of white lies, but I never heard somebody say,
?I think lying is morally good”.
Further, “. . . there is no way of teaching subjects without teaching
values. So let’s be upfront about that and have explicit curriculum.
If we don’t, we are going to teach values only in hidden and most
devious ways. Let’s have discussions about the values we want to
transmit”.
Ryan (1993) maintains that the Chinese concept of the Tao (becoming a
good person) can provide a framework for character education:
“Over the years, teachers, curriculum
specialists, and school officials have used the Tao, albeit unconsciously,
to guide the work of schools. Translated into curriculum, the Tao guides
schools to educate children to be concerned about the weak and those in
need; to help others; to work hard and complete their tasks well and promptly,
even when they do not want to; to control their tempers; to work cooperatively
with others and practice good manners; to respect authority and other
people’s rights; to help resolve conflicts; to understand honesty,
responsibility, and friendship; to balance pleasures with responsibilities;
and to ask themselves and decide ?What is the right thing to do?’”
Although people will debate the specific values and character attributes
which students should have, very few believe that values and character
education have no place in American education.
8. Multi-age Classrooms
Multi-age, or non-graded, instruction is the practice of grouping elementary
school children of different ages (typically within three years of age)
into the same classroom for the purpose of improving student learning.
Educators remind us that grouping students of different ages together
to save money is not what is meant by multi-age instruction.
Wisconsin’s citizens have mixed views about multi-age instruction.
One-half support multi-age grouping at the elementary level, while 36%
are opposed. The remainder, 13%, say that they “don’t know”
(WEAC Poll, July, 1996).
Proponents of multi-age instruction argue that the predominant practice
of using graded classrooms rests on the assumption that children of the
same age are at about the same level of intellectual development and that
students in a graded class will progress at approximately the same rate.
In contrast, supporters of multi-age classrooms believe that grouping
students of different ages is a recognition of the fact that children
have different rates of social, emotional, physical, and academic development.
In particular, proponents feel that multi-age instruction allows children
of different ages to cooperate and learn from each other (Multi-age,
Non-graded Primary Program, 1996).
There also is the important question of how multi-age instruction affects
academic achievement. In 1992, Pavan reported that in 64 studies of multi-age
programs, nongraded groups performed better 58% of the time, the same
33% of the time, and worse in 9% of the studies. Pavan also reports that
in comparison with students in graded schools, students in non-graded
schools had more positive attitudes toward school and higher levels of
self-esteem.
In a 1996 article in Education Week, Viadero concludes that there
is a small, but growing, body of research showing that students taught
in multi-age classrooms do as well as or better than their peers in traditional
graded classrooms. However, it is emphasized that in order to be effective,
multi-age programs must be carefully designed, implemented, and evaluated.
9. Time and Learning
“A Nation At Risk,” published in 1983, recommended that the
school year for American students be lengthened to between 200 and 220
days. That recommendation emerged from comparative international studies
which showed that Japanese, German, and French students all spent considerably
more hours studying core academic subjects.
In addition to extending the traditional school year, other time-use
innovations have included year-round schools, block scheduling, and various
strategies to increase teacher planning time. Manipulating the amount
and use of school/learning time has become a key component in the effort
to improve academic achievement.
As an example, the National Education Commission on Time and Learning,
in its report Prisoners of Time (1994), made eight recommendations
regarding the use of time in schools:
- reinvent schools around learning, not time;
- change the fixed clock and calendar to better use students’
time in school;
- organize the school day so that students spend at least five and
a half hours learning core academic subjects;
- keep schools open for expanded services and activities;
- give teachers more time to prepare for their classes;
- seize the promise of new technologies to increase productivity;
- enhance student achievement, and expand learning time; and
- develop local action plans to transform schools; build coalitions
of policy makers, community leaders, educators, and parents to make
learning a national obsession.
Specific proposals to alter the dimensions or use of school time have
particular goals. For example, Glines, 1994, cites a number of pros in
defense of year-round schooling which include enhancing student learning,
giving students and teachers a refreshed and motivated feeling after returning
from shorter breaks, reducing discipline problems, improving student and
teacher attendance, and reducing teacher stress.
Arguments against year-round schools include a lack of evidence for achievement
gains, scheduling problems, conflicts with family lifestyles and extracurricular
activities, and increased operational costs (Alberta Department of Education,
1991).
Block scheduling, another time-structure innovation, reduces the number
of classes in which a student is enrolled but increases the instructional
time in those classes. Instead of a traditional 6, 7, or 8 period day
with classes of fifty minutes in length, a high school on a block schedule
might offer four scheduling blocks of ninety minutes each. Typical classes
run for one semester, thus allowing students to take eight classes each
school year.
Proponents of block schedules argue that the benefits of this innovation
include improved student time on task, more opportunity for active learning,
less stress for students, improved school climate, more scheduling flexibility,
less stress for teachers, improved attendance, improved student performance,
more curricular choices for students, and concentrated preparation time
for teachers (Bodette and Matarrese, 1996).
While evidence of block scheduling effectiveness is largely anecdotal,
some preliminary data have been reported. Wasson High School in Colorado
Springs adopted the 90 minute block schedule in 1989. The school reported
the following results in 1993: a 6.7% increase of students on the honor
role, a 9.2% decrease in the failure rate, a 22% increase in students
continuing post-secondary education, a 4.4% increase in the attendance
rate, and a 45% increase in students scoring 3 or higher on AP examinations
(Roy J. Wasson High School, 1993).
Critics of this innovation claim that longitudinal Canadian studies demonstrate
that block scheduling hurts academic performance, that special courses
such as music and other fine arts require regular involvement, that some
courses such as mathematics, science, and foreign language seem to be
best taught in shorter segments, that the one semester per course approach
causes retention problems, and that adolescent attention spans make 90
minute class periods problematic and, in order to accommodate this reality,
content is actually watered down (Lindsay, 1996).
Bateson (1990) studied 30,000 10th grade science students, some of whom
took an all-year course while others took science for one semester in
a block schedule format. Students who took science under a full credit
semester system did not score as well on a multiple choice test of science
knowledge as students who took the year-long course.
10. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards
The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) was created
in 1987 by a group of classroom teachers, other educators, policy makers,
and national leaders. Its mission is to establish high standards for what
exemplary teachers should know and be able to do, to develop and operate
a voluntary national system to assess and certify teachers who meet these
standards, and to support educational reforms for the purpose of improving
student achievement. Certification by NBPTS is designed for experienced,
not beginning, teachers who understand how theory translates into practice,
who can ascertain what works, and who are able to function as mature professional
decision-makers.
The NBPTS is setting standards in some 30 certificate fields with each
field structured by two dimensions- the developmental level
of the student and the subject being taught. Six developmental
levels have been identified: Early Childhood (ages 3-8), Middle Childhood
(ages 7-12), Early and Middle Childhood (ages 3-12), Early Adolescence
(ages 11-15), Adolescence and Young Adulthood (ages 14-18+), and Early
Adolescence through Young Adulthood (ages 11-18+).
NBPTS certification in 1997-98 is available in the following areas:
- Early Childhood/Generalist
- Early Adolescent/Generalist
- Early Adolescence/English Language Arts
- Middle School/Generalist
- Early Adolescence and Young Adulthood/Art
- Adolescence and Young Adulthood/Mathematics
- Adolescence and Young Adulthood/Science
The certification process is a two-part assessment. The first part requires
a teacher to construct a portfolio of various facets of classroom teaching.
It includes student work, videotapes of classroom activities, and other
documentation. The portfolio also includes teacher commentary on the goals
and purposes of instruction, the effectiveness of instruction and assessment,
reflections on what occurred, and rationale for both practice and reflections.
The second component of the certification process involves a series of
activities at Sylvan Technology Center during the summer of 1998. These
activities are designed to provide teachers with an opportunity to demonstrate
knowledge, skills, abilities, and judgments in situations where actual
assessment of teaching performance is not possible. The current fee for
the NBPTS process is $2,000. Limited WEAC funds are available to support
members seeking certification.
For an application, call the National Board at 1-800-532-1813.
11. Restructuring School Governance
Decentralizing school decision-making structures through site-based decision-making,
site-based management, or shared decision-making as a mechanism for school
improvement rests on three assumptions:
1. Flattening school decision-making hierarchies will improve
student performance. It will produce more appropriate school policies
and practices because teachers have better information since they are
closer to the students. Shared decisions will tend to focus more on teaching,
learning and student issues. Finally, high participation will unleash
teacher creativity and innovation.
2. High quality governance will stimulate teacher professionalism.
Teachers will be in charge of their own practice, will control working
conditions, and will be committed to the decisions they make.
3. High quality governance is an expression of the democratic
ideal. Participation is intrinsically fair and democratic; schools should
model this ideal (Weiss, 1993).
Despite the promise of these assumptions and the well-publicized successes
of employee participation in the private sector, research suggests that
schools face a much more difficult task as they attempt to decentralize.
Weiss (1993,1994) has examined the degree to which the assumptions underlying
decentralized management have been realized in schools. After a longitudinal
study of twelve high schools in eleven states, Weiss concluded that “the
evidence does not support either hypothesis, that SDM (shared decision-making)
focuses attention on curriculum and students or that SDM leads to innovation
and creative change”.
Further research on school governance has lead Wohlstetter, Smyer, and
Mohrman (1994) to suggest that “a means-end relationship between
governance and school improvement is difficult to argue in the absence
of some kind of instructional guidance mechanism that sets forth the direction
of change with regard to curriculum and instruction, the technical core
of schooling”. In other words, when there is absent an intentional
purpose of improving the quality of teaching and learning, there is no
certainty that a site council will arrive at such an improvement strategy.
The failure of governance reform to produce teaching and learning reforms
should not be surprising. Two explanations have been offered. Richard
Elmore (1992) has examined the assertion that changing organizational
structures will result in changes in teaching and learning. He concludes
that the two assertions are not logically or theoretically linked.
Although current practice is clearly situated within current school structures,
it is not at all clear that the structures shaped the practice. Changing
school structures may be a necessary condition for changing teaching practices,
but it is not a sufficient condition (Newmann, 1993).
A second explanation for the failure of alternative governance structures
to change teaching practice and improve student learning suggests that
the scope of changes in school governance has not been broad enough. Research
from the private sector indicates that the high involvement decision-making
model schools have borrowed from successful businesses requires extensive
decentralization of four variables: power, knowledge, information and
rewards (Odden, Wohlstetter and Odden, 1995).
Schools have not dealt effectively with these four variables. In schools,
where hierarchical authority is traditional, sharing power tends to produce
turf wars; extensive training and knowledge are required so that participants
are able to function effectively; information is closely held by those
who traditionally controlled it; and school reward or compensation structures
tend to resist all changes.
12. Charter Schools
The charter school concept is based on the belief that if teachers, parents,
administrators, and others are set free from rules, regulations, and mandates,
they will create schools which better meet the needs of all students.
Ultimately, it is argued, charter schools will produce higher levels of
parent involvement, innovative reforms, and improved student learning.
The first charter school began in the fall of 1992 in St. Paul, Minnesota
at City Academy. City Academy was chartered for the purpose of giving
teachers and administrators flexibility and autonomy in meeting the needs
of the segment of urban students who were considered the hardest to reach
and teach.
Wisconsin’s original charter school legislation was passed in July,
1993. The legislation allowed as many as ten school districts to create
up to two charter schools per district (a maximum of twenty charter schools
statewide). Two years later, the 1993 legislation was repealed, and school
districts were allowed to create as many charter schools as desired. Under
the 1995 law, charter schools still are instrumentalities of the school
district and employees of the charter schools are district employees.
Charter schools in Wisconsin are given the option to hire teachers who
have a special charter school certification to cover all grades and topics.
Persons who have a bachelor’s degree and proficiency in certain areas
also can teach in a charter school, using a one-year teaching permit.
The Milwaukee Public School system was given special attention in the
1995 legislation. For example, in MPS there is no requirement that charter
school personnel be district employees. Furthermore, existing schools
in Milwaukee may be converted to charter schools, and the charter school’s
staff is not bound by the existing collective bargaining agreement.
At the beginning of the 1997-98 school year, there were seventeen charter
schools operating in Wisconsin:
- Teachers Educating, Advising, and Mentoring Students (TEAMS, Stevens
Point)
- Appleton Central Alternative School
- School of Technology and the Arts (LaCrosse )
- School of Technology and the Arts II (LaCrosse )
- New Century School (Verona)
- Core Knowledge Charter School (Verona)
- Deerfield Alternative High School
- Highland Community School (Milwaukee)
- Ladysmith Evening Alternative School
- McKinley Charter School (Eau Claire)
- Affiliated Alternatives (Madison)
- The Brompton School (Kenosha Unified School District)
- Paideia Charter School Academy (Kenosha Unified School District)
- Kickapoo River Institute (North Crawford)
- Middleton Alternative Senior High (Middleton)
- Beaver Dam Charter School
- James C. Wright Middle School (Madison)
13. Public School Choice
Beginning in the 1998-99 school year a K-12 student may attend any public
school in Wisconsin, if space is available. A child may attend a pre-kindergarten
or early childhood program if the resident school offers the same type
of program and the pupil is eligible.
In order to attend another school, the parent must submit an application
to the non-resident district during February, 1998. The non-resident district
is required to notify the applicant of acceptance or rejection. If accepted,
the parents must notify the non-resident district during June that their
child will be attending the school.
Many of the provisions of this program are highly detailed. For additional
information contact the DPI home page at following address: www.dpi.state.wi.us.
(Use the Search & Index feature and enter the words, “open enrollment”).
Some of the most important features of this program are as follows:
- A non-resident school district may reject a student who wishes to
transfer for several reasons, including the following: because of shortage
of space, because the student has exceptional educational needs which
can not be met or which are too expensive, or because the student has
been expelled or is undergoing disciplinary proceedings. Districts participating
in the 220 program can refuse to accept a student if acceptance would
increase racial imbalance in the school district.
- Initially, a district may limit the number of students transferring
out to 3% of its student population in the 1998-99 school year. This
figure increases by 1% each year for seven years, after which there
is no limit.
- Once a student is accepted, the student need not reapply in subsequent
years. However, the non-resident district may require re-application
(one time only) when a pupil enters middle, junior high, or high school.
- Non-resident districts are required to give preference to pupils
and siblings already attending school in the district.
- If there are more applications than spaces, pupils must be selected
on a random basis.
- Parents are responsible for transportation (unless transportation
for an EEN pupil is required by a child’s IEP).
14. Private School Choice
Private school choice, in which parents are awarded vouchers to send
their children to private schools, has gained support in this country.
Advocates of private school choice believe that private schools do a better
job of educating students than the public schools. In explaining this
success, critics typically argue that private schools are unencumbered
by bureaucracies, unions, and unreasonable state rules and regulations.
Choice advocates maintain that the resulting competition among and between
public and private schools will improve the overall quality of American
education.
The case for private school choice as a remedy for what is wrong with
public education rests on questionable assumptions and a weak research
base. A brief summary of selected aspects of the research literature follow.
Public and Private School Achievement Levels
In general, U. S. students who attend private schools achieve at higher
levels than do public school students. However, research consistently
has shown that these differences are insignificant and primarily attributable
to factors such as differences in student backgrounds (Alexander and Pallis,
1985; Levin, 1990; and Meyer, 1989).
Private schools do not accept all students who wish to attend. In 1982,
Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore reported that the screening criteria typically
include personal interviews, grades, and analysis of behavioral patterns.
Likewise, research by Corwin (1993) found that nearly all Catholic schools
(which represent the largest proportion of private schools in the United
States) require test scores for admission, in addition to strong academic
records (61% of sampled schools), recommendations of elementary school
principals (73%), and successful completion of the previous school year
(98%). About one-half require interviews with parents and students.
Corwin notes that only a minority of Catholic schools provide bilingual
services (9%), programs for the handicapped (12%), or vocational/technical
programs (14%). These practices stand in sharp contrast to America’s
public schools which are required to educate all students in a community,
regardless of personal or family characteristics.
In Wisconsin’s public schools, 12.4% of students receive special
education services. In contrast to this figure, of the 150,140 students
enrolled in the state’s private schools as of December 1, 1996, only
1,119 (.75%) were enrolled in special education programs.
There also are those who remind us that a system of private school vouchers
would erode the advantages that private schools currently have, including
selective admission policies, a smaller bureaucracy, and lower salaries.
For example, Corwin (1993) concludes that the costs of private schools
would soon rise under a voucher program because private schools would
be pressured to educate all children, including those with special needs.
Once this happens, they will face the same problems encountered by the
typical public school. Perhaps this is why many representatives of mainline
church schools have expressed concern about the potential impact of a
voucher system on their curricula and programs.
Finally, one should be leery of the assertion that competition from private
schools will benefit public education. Carnoy (1993) concludes that this
conviction is based on the dubious premise that a little competition from
a few private schools will reform the vast enterprise of public education.
In 1990, Wisconsin created the Milwaukee Choice Program. This was the
nation’s first private school voucher program and was intended to
help “correct” the problems of the Milwaukee Public School System.
The Milwaukee Choice Program allows up to 1.5% of all students in Milwaukee
Public Schools to attend nonsectarian schools at public expense (the amount
of the voucher is equal to the Milwaukee Public School per-student, state
aid). In order to be eligible, students must come from households with
an income no greater than 1.75 times the poverty level. In addition, students
must not have been in private schools or in school districts other than
Milwaukee Public Schools during the previous year.
Participating schools must be nonsectarian and are limited to having
65% of their current enrollment consist of choice students. If student
applications exceed enrollment limits, schools are required to use
a random selection process. Participating schools do not have to meet
the same educational standards which are required of public schools in
Wisconsin. For example, they are not required to employ certified teachers;
nor are they required to accept students with Exceptional Educational
Needs.
During the 1996-97 school year, 1,606 students attended 20 private schools.
Participation in prior years was as follows: 1990-91: 337; 1991-92: 504;
1992-93: 591; 1993-94: 718; 1994-95: 786; 1995-96: 1320.
The standards for participating private schools are minimal, for they
must meet only one of four criteria: (1) 70% or more of the students must
advance at least one grade level each year; (2) there must be an average
attendance rate of 90%; (3) at least 80% of the students must demonstrate
significant academic progress, or (4) at least 70% of parents must meet
parent involvement criteria established by each of the participating schools.
Analysis of test data from the Milwaukee Choice Program for the past
several years has shown that the performance of voucher children is about
equal to the students who have remained in Milwaukee public schools (Witte,
1995). This finding is not unexpected because research shows that the
differences in achievement between public and private school students
are primarily a function of family characteristics and that the family
and social circumstances of the Milwaukee choice and Milwaukee public
school children are essentially the same. (It should be noted that children
who have entered the choice schools tend to be somewhat poorer and have
lower levels of achievement than children who remained in MPS).
The popular media also has begun to investigate the issue of private
school superiority. In the October, 1994 issue of Money Magazine
Topolnicki reached some important conclusions in an empirical study
of public and private schools:
- “Forget the myth that private schools are the best. Our survey
shows many public schools are every bit as good--if not better”.
- Students who attend the best public schools outperform most private
school students. Furthermore, the level of student achievement is relatively
similar at advantaged public and elite prep schools.
- The average public school teacher has stronger academic qualifications
than the average private school teacher. In fact, half of all public
school teachers hold advanced degrees, compared with only a third of
private school instructors.
- The best public schools offer a more challenging curriculum than
most private schools.
- Public school class sizes are no larger than in most private schools
and are smaller than in most Catholic schools.
- “The best news to come out of Money’s survey of
public and private schools across America was that by and large, public
schools are not lacking in experienced topnotch teachers, challenging
courses or an environment that is conducive to learning. What many public
schools are lacking is a student body brimming with kids eager to take
advantage of what the school has to offer”.
- “Shocked? So were we. After all, some of us, like some of you,
send our children to private schools and thus pay twice for education--through
high property taxes plus tuition. Indeed, roughly 30% of the kids who
live in affluent public school districts came out best in our study
attend private schools, vs. only 11% of all U.S. students. If you are
the parent of one of those kids, here’s the bottom line: You are
probably wasting your hard-earned money”.
15. Home Schooling
Throughout much of the early history of the United States, parents who
wanted an education for their children had no option but to offer instruction
in the home. Attendance at a private school was not a realistic alternative
for many Americans.
Even after public schools were established in most areas and public education
became an option for nearly everyone, some groups elected to educate their
children at home. For example, members of certain religious sects, including
the Amish, did not want their children attending the public schools. The
right of the Amish to educate their children at home was upheld in a 1972
decision by the United States Supreme Court (Wisconsin v. Yoder).
After this decision, others began to select home schooling as an alternative
to either public or private schools. At the present time, all states allow
home-schooling as a way to meet compulsory attendance laws. Nearly every
state requires families to file basic information with either the state
or some local education agency. In addition, many states have further
requirements, including submission of a curricular plan and testing of
students. In 1996, it was estimated that approximately one-half million
children (about 1% of all school-age children) were home-schooled.
Research on the achievement levels of students who are taught at home
is limited. However, the data which exist indicate that students who are
home-schooled perform above average on traditional standardized achievement
tests. There also is concern about the effect that home schooling may
have on a child’s social and psychological development. Critics point
out that children who have limited contact with others their same age
may be at a disadvantage later in life.
The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction estimates that 16,000
children (approximately 2% of all school-age children in the state) currently
are taught in a home setting by a parent, another relative, or a guardian.
In Wisconsin, parents who teach their children at home must complete
a one-page statement each year telling the state that they are home-schooling
their children; the DPI then notifies the local school district that the
students are not truant. Parents also must affirm in the statement that
they are providing instruction in six areas: reading, language arts, mathematics,
social studies, science, and health. Among the few other requirements,
parents must indicate that their children receive at least 875 hours of
instruction each year and answer the question, “Are you teaching
at home to avoid or circumvent the state law requiring children to attend
school?”
Parents then are required to list the ages of all children taught at
home, sign the form, and return it to the Department of Public Instruction.
| |
| School year | Families | Children |
| 1985-86 | N/A | 1,941 |
| 1990-91 | 3,639 | 6,661 |
| 1991-92 | 4,253 | 7,805 |
| 1992-93 | 5,209 | 9,401 |
| 1993-94 | 6,359 | 11,483 |
| 1994-95 | 7,470 | 13,458 |
| 1995-96 | N/A | 16,000 (est.) |
| 1996-97 | N/A | 16,924 (est.) |
16. Reduced Class Sizes
Research has shown that reductions in class sizes can lead to improved
student achievement. The discussion which follows considers four of these
studies: (1) Project Star, (2) the Lasting Benefits Study, (3) Research
by Educational Testing Service on the effects of class size reductions
on student achievement, and (4) the SAGE Program. In addition, there is
a brief summary of research by WEAC on class sizes in Wisconsin’s
public schools.
(1). Project Star: Tennessee’s
Project STAR, a four-year study of class size effect, has produced
the most compelling data on class size, effective teaching strategies,
and the sustainability of early student achievement gains to date. The
longitudinal study followed students from kindergarten in 1985-86 through
the third grade in 1988-89. A Lasting Benefits Study was begun in 1989,
to determine whether the achievement gains in grades K-3 persisted over
time.
Project STAR, authorized by the Tennessee legislature, studied student
achievement in three types of K-3 classes: small classes (13-17
students per teacher), regular classes (22-25 students per
teacher), and regular classes (22-25 students) with a teacher
and a full-time teacher aide (Word, et al., 1990).
The project included 17 inner-city, 16 suburban, 8 urban, and 39 rural
schools and involved 6,500 students in 330 classrooms. Students and teachers
were randomly assigned to class types.
Student achievement effects were measured with three standardized instruments.
By the end of the first grade STAR students in small classes were outperforming
students in regular and regular/aide classes by a wide margin. By grade
three, the pattern established in the first grade had become firmly fixed.
A strong class size effect was evident in all school locations (urban,
rural, inner-city and suburban) and for all students (Word).
(2). Lasting Benefits Study
The Lasting Benefits Study (LBS) has continued to track students who
participated in Project STAR from 1985-89 in order to determine whether
the achievement advantages of students from the small classes were maintained
after these students returned to regular- sized classes in the fourth
grade. The data from 1990-1994 show that students who were originally
in smaller classes continued to perform better than the students from
regular-sized classes, with or without a teacher’s aide (Mosteller,
1995).
(3). Educational Testing Service Study
In 1997, Educational Testing Service published a research study completed
by Harold Wenglinsky in which he studied the relationship between spending
and student achievement by analyzing data from three separate sources:
National Assessment of Educational Progress, the Common Core of Data,
and the Teacher’s Cost Index of the National Center for Education
Statistics.
Wenglinsky’s research shows that increased spending for smaller
classes has a direct positive effect on student achievement for fourth
grade students. Among eighth graders, the relationship is somewhat more
complex, in that reduced class sizes improve the social environment (leading
to fewer problems) which improve student achievement.
(4). The SAGE Program
In June, 1995, the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE)
program was signed into law as a five year pilot program. Participating
districts receive $2,000 per student and are required to meet specific
“contractual” requirements with the Department of Public Instruction
and also to take part in an extensive evaluation of the program conducted
by the Center for Urban Initiatives and Research at the University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
The program is intended to improve education by reducing class sizes
in grades K-3 to no more than 15 students (in grades K-1 during 1996-97,
grades K-2 in 1997-98, and grades K-3 in 1998 - 1999 through 2000-2001).
In addition, districts had to agree to turn schools into “lighted
schoolhouses” which are open for extended hours, to develop rigorous
academic programs, and to establish and implement plans for staff development
and accountability.
In order to participate, a school had to serve high percentages of low
income children. (The specific requirements for eligibility are defined
in the State Statutes (s. 118.43 (2)). During the 1996-97 school year,
30 schools from 21 school districts participated in the SAGE program.
First year results of the SAGE Program were reported in December 1997
(Maier, Molnar, Smith, and Zahorik). After one year, students in the SAGE
first grade classrooms scored higher on the Comprehensive Tests of Basic
Skills than first grade students in the comparison schools. As a group,
SAGE students scored significantly higher on the post-test in reading,
language arts, and mathematics.
Although the 1997 SAGE results show promise for increasing academic achievement
of children living in poverty, the authors of the report suggest that
the first year results be viewed with caution. As the data on SAGE students
accumulate over time, it will be possible to draw much firmer conclusions
about the effects of this program on student achievement.
(5). WEAC Class Size Studies
In a 1992 study of WEAC teacher members, it was found that the typical
teacher has classes which contain from 23 to 26 students. Furthermore,
significant numbers of teachers teach hundreds of different students during
the school year. As a result, it is difficult for teachers to know their
students well, to understand how their minds work, to know what motivates
them, or to know their individual strengths and weaknesses. This same
study found that nearly three-quarters of elementary teachers and two-thirds
of middle, junior, and senior high teachers say that they would change
the way they teach if they had fewer students. Among the changes cited
were giving more individual attention to students, requiring more written
assignments, involving students in more problem-solving activities, and
trying out new ideas (Allen and Kickbusch, 1992).
A study completed in 1997 of K-6 class sizes in Wisconsin’s public
schools had three noteworthy findings:
- At the kindergarten level, 92% of Wisconsin’s classrooms currently
exceed the lower standard established by Project STAR of 15 or fewer
students per teacher. In fact, 27% of kindergarten teachers report classes
of 25 or more.
- For teachers in grades 1-6, 94% of the self-contained classrooms
exceed a 15 student maximum. Among teachers who meet with multiple classes
each day, one-fourth meet with more than 125 students daily.
- Class size policies have been established by approximately 39% of
Wisconsin’s school districts. However, in 77% of the cases 25 or
more students are allowed in a classroom.
Back
to the Table of Contents