FOCUS: What method should we use for school improvement in the U.S.? How do we attract high quality teachers and retain them?
In the discussion with Dave Iverson of KQED in San Francisco a panel of education professionals were interviewed. The group included: Carlos Garcia, superintendent for San Francisco Unified School District; Tim Daly, president of the New Teacher Project; Catherine Lewis, a research fellow in education at Mills College and author of "Educating Hearts and Minds: Reflections on Japanese Preschool and Elementary Education;” and Alan Miller, an English teacher at Berkeley High School and former vice president of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers (a union under CTA).
Iverson posted a question on how to improve schools in the United States and made references of the McKinsey report on school improvement. McKinsey is a governmental and education consulting firm. According to the report, recruiting highly qualified teachers is the best approach to educational reform and that the current reform does not focus on teacher recruitment. It was reported that Canada, Japan, South Korea, Finland and Singapore implement this method and their students outpace American students on national tests. Additionally, it is stated in the findings that money wasn’t a problem.
The panel agreed that most teachers leave a university teaching program with little experience and training on how to manage a real-life classroom. Additionally, each felt there was a need for on-the-job training and that most teachers learn while working in the classroom.
Following are the responses each professional gave to the question posed and then my response to both the question and the answers given by each.
Catherine Lewis’s response: Lewis stated that in her research on education in Japan she found that there was a high emphasis on job learning and most teachers there learned while working in schools. Their model showed how teachers collaborated with each other planning and implementing lessons based on what they thought were the future needs of students. After the lesson, they would discuss how students responded to lessons and how they can improve the lesson next time. The process is called “Lesson Studies.” She claimed that in addition to money, we need to be able to somehow keep teachers. Lewis observed that this country has a high turnover rate of teacher, and to keep them; a need for collaboration w/mentor teachers is best. She warned that districts and schools need to use money wisely when incorporating professional development and to stay away from top-down lectures. Additionally, she thinks that there is too much money spent on testing when testing does not change the quality of education. In reference to where the focus in education should be she stated there should be more focus on study lessons and less on testing and that the curriculum should be less broad and more meaningful.
Fifi’s response to Lewis: Teachers do need time to collaborate. In my own experience, I was most successful when teachers observed my lessons and shared criticism and ideas with me. When I began my teaching career at my first site in Miami, I had very little support. Luckily, I began a teaching credential program and I quickly learned while I worked with students. Upon moving to California and continuing educational courses through CalState TEACH and working in Hayward, I grew as a professional. The growth was a reflection of the mentoring received by the reading specialist, program specialist, and math coach at that school. I also had both an outstanding university professor and teacher mentor that helped fine-tune classroom management and lesson planning and implementation while servicing my class. The administration at that site allowed time every Wednesday for collaboration, but there was a need to improve how teachers got together and reflected on lesson plans and student data. I worked at a Title I school and a lot of funds were allocated for staff development. The workshops were very engaging and useful in my classroom. However, with all the training I received and professional goals established, that site could NOT retain me. I chose to leave the school and district because I was overburdened with the social conditions I experienced unrelated to good mentoring or training and good teaching. My decision was the effect of layoff notices received every spring that then forced me to look for work elsewhere until receiving a call to come back in the summer to return to the district, and also due to the economic, social and political history of the community I serviced in which both the school and students were challenged with.
Upon leaving that site and district I have never experience positive collaboration and mentoring like I did there. Every teacher (new and veteran) that I came across, in the other district struggled with poor classroom management and/or poor lessons. I worked at a district in which schools performed better than that of the previous district according to state data. Some of these “veteran” teachers had not experienced any progressive professional development in the past years they had been teaching. Also, their community had changed around them but they hadn’t. They were challenged with addressing English learners, socially economic disadvantaged students, and multiculturalism. They continued teaching in the same manner that they taught their previous community that happened to move elsewhere. I was isolated in that my educational experience and beliefs were so different from theirs and administration did not have the experience in addressing the changing community’s needs.
Teacher collaboration and job learning alone will not address the improvement needed in education in the U.S., and we cannot compare ourselves to Japan a more homogeneous type of country. However, I do believe that we cannot do without learning from and cooperating with other teachers.
Education reform must focus also on the curriculum at hand. In first grade alone, most concepts taught are brand new to students. Because of time constraints lessons are very broad and taught quickly with little practice. I, at times, feel overwhelmed with the amount of minutes allocated for each area and the inability to teach in thematic ways due to the program improvement status at my current district and the requirements to sticking to state adopted curriculum and standards. I ask myself: Who are these people in legislation and reformation making these inappropriate decisions? They definitely haven’t visited a classroom in awhile and have no knowledge of human growth development.
Carlos Garcia’s response: Garcia noted that many new teachers aren’t trained to deal with your average classroom. An example he gave was that teachers weren’t prepared on using parents and instructional aides in classrooms. He also explained that there is a financial issue when incorporating time for collaboration because you need experienced teachers to do it and you have to pay for it. Garcia believed that to compare the U.S. to other cultures was wrong in that our history is different than others. He stated that there is a lack of respect for teachers and education is under funded in this country. Garcia asserted that the BTSA program offered at SFUSD helps many new teachers. He is left with the challenge of constructing the day to have collaboration and obtaining “veteran” teachers. In addition, money is poorly allocated as he reflected his experience entering as a new superintendent to San Francisco from Las Vegas. He observed how little resources there were in the city compared to other places he lived in.
Fifi’s response to Garcia’s statements: Many new teachers in programs that require full time attendance in a traditional university classroom setting suffer from on-the-job training in that they are not working full time as classroom teachers. They get little experience during the student teaching component of the program. Mainly, they’ll observe a “master” teacher and might be involved in teaching a few lessons here and there. At times they are taken advantage of by having to grade papers, make copies, file papers or if lucky work with a small group tutoring. Teachers who have their own classroom and students benefit from being in nontraditional teacher education programs that help support the teacher already in the classroom.
In regards to parents and instructional aides, the school setting and climate culture vary from site to site and districts. The only instructional aides that come to my mind are that of students identified with learning disabilities or health issues covered under IDEA. These aides also vary. If a teacher is lucky, she/he may be able to use the aide in assisting the student that is assigned to him/her and also with other students who may not qualify for an aide but can benefit from getting quality educational assistance from the aide. Some aides have problems managing the student given to them. The recruitment of highly qualified para-educators is also a challenge for many districts due to the fact that one does NOT need a bachelor’s degree to become an aide, and aides, too, get poor training, if any. Instructional aides not related to special education do NOT exist in the districts I have previously serviced and presently serve because of funding.
I, also, believe that there is a morale issue with teachers and that there is a self-devaluation of especially teachers who have had little support in their careers. An outsider can be intimidating to some for fear of negative criticism or “bad” talk about them behind their backs. So, some teachers might not welcome aides or parents into classrooms. I was looked poorly upon at my last site for using parents in my classroom, because many of the teachers there believed the parents would tell other parents how a teacher was managing the class. They did not welcome parents into their classrooms.
Because communities are defined by economic, social and political history the use of parents in classrooms vary. The very first school I worked at was a charter middle school. There were specific requirements for parent involvement in order to maintain the student at that school. However, I never saw any parents nor did any parent respond to my initial headhunting for volunteers, because most of the parents were full time working parents. Furthermore, some parents feel that there isn’t a need to volunteer in the middle and high school grades. When students are in primary education many parents have a need to check up on what’s happening in school because their child is defenseless in the institution of education, and they want what’s best for their child.
When I moved to California and worked at the Title I school many of my parents did not speak English. I worked in a bi-lingual (Spanish) class. Although I spoke Spanish they felt shy and uncomfortable coming into the class to assist. I speak Spanish but am of a different culture than that of those I was servicing. The following two years I worked in a shelter English immersion class, and I had one parent who did come in and help with filing and photocopying. This school serviced 96% of students on free or reduced lunch. Most mothers stayed at home to watch younger siblings and maintain the home. Some were illiterate, while others had very little education. Most were from another country. I got what they were able to give. It didn’t stop me from trying to get assistance from them but the help was different than that in the community I serviced next.
When I left that district, I serviced a community where many of the mothers also stayed at home. There were times that other teachers at that site were amazed to see a group of people (mostly female) standing in front of my class door at the beginning of every school day. It was an incredible community that truly respected teachers, and I used them as best I could. There was a large immigrant population at the site with some parents speaking little English but still I was able to train them to run some centers that didn’t require the teacher. They made copies, assembled books, filed papers and cleaned. I had one American mother who I trained to read with certain students. This community was one in which the economic class and educational level made it possible for these mothers to volunteer their time effectively.
At the district my son currently attends school at, they have a one-day training with the district reading specialist offered to volunteers in which the trainer creates a reading workshop to teach parents how to read with students. These volunteers then are put on an availability list and teachers will call the district office to have them come in and help with reading activities. I think this is a great asset to the district. It’s very innovative and links the schools with their communities. I believe it can be done on a site level as well.
It’s not always easy to get volunteers, but it helps a great deal. A workshop on recruiting parent volunteers can be an option a district or school can consider in helping connect schools with the communities they service. Keep in mind though that one can only give what they have.
Money is a huge problem in the state of California. This is a state with large sales taxes and a state income tax! What on earth happens to the money? However, collaboration does not necessarily require money but time. There are ways that schools bank instructional time with students therefore having one early release day a week. During the time teachers are not with their students but within the workday they can get together to plan or observe a lesson or discuss student samples and data. Additionally, if the site administrator plans preps accordingly so that at least two teachers can collaborate during this time then this can also improve the quality of education.
Alan Miller’s response to the report: Miller feels that teachers need good training, good pay and good working conditions. He explains that in other professions people get paid for training while teachers pay for training. He also states that testing should be changed to reflect good teaching. The multiple choice test form is not the best assessment tool available.
Fifi’s response to Miller’s statements: Truly, we are the unprivileged workforce, but that shouldn’t be surprising. Public schooling is funded publicly and therefore non-profit. Other workforces may have the funds provided to train their employees.
When comparing the history of education to other cultures, education in Japan can be traced back to the 6th century while in the U.S. the 17th century. The U.S. is a young country, and the earliest recording of education was in the 1600’s in which Massachusetts established a few schools mostly private. Education in the south didn’t reach until after the civil war! In the 1900 a little more than half of all the states demanded that students go to school. Most students were only required to finish elementary school. Teachers didn’t really need to be professionally trained and many females taught. Teaching became a female dominated institution and historically and presently women are paid less.
Tim Daly’s response: Daly discussed to attract teachers the overall job market needs to be looked at and to make teaching attractive the profession needs to be valued like an attorney or doctor. He also warned how many districts allocate money in central administration rather than teachers. He referenced how Washington, D.C. and Newark spent a lot but had very little positive results. Daly believes that some districts may benefit from decentralizing and allowing schools to be autonomous in selecting curriculum and programs that reflect their community’s needs.
Fifi’s response to Daly: The starting salary of an elementary site administrator at a nearby school district is $105,117 per year. In the same district the starting salary for a teacher is $54,866 nearly half of the salary earned by the principal.
Many principals today seek teacher leaders at their schools to assist in administrative duties. These duties are tied into what is considered additional professional hours required by teachers as per their contract between the district and the union. Most districts require 40 hours yearly of additional duties on top of those duties required in planning and preparing materials to teach. Those teachers who sit on SBDM (Site-Based Decision Making) or SSC (School Site Council) find themselves putting in much more than 40 hours. These committees are responsible for many decisions, which resonate in curriculum programs or facilities operations of the school. These groups decide funding.
At times, a “teacher-in-charge” might be pulled out of class and replaced by a substitute teacher for the day in order for that “teacher-in-charge” to take over while the principal is out. I’ve found myself at times taking on tasks that were administrative in order to fulfill the additional hours requirement and expose myself to leadership roles. There is way too much money allocated for principals. The reality is that if a school did not have an administrator the school would continue to function. If a school did not have teachers, nothing would be accomplished.
Children from one community whose economic, social, political and cultural histories are different from those of other communities should have education that meets their needs. In order for effective teaching to take place educators think about what the needs of the students are and then create lessons to address the needs and assess how the students responded to the lessons. This is a classic educational process that we’ve deviated from. The needs of a school whose population is on free or reduced lunch is different from that of schools with exceptionally low numbers of socially economic disadvantaged students. Having generalized standards that all students need to meet at the same time defeats the purpose of education.
When a student of mine has not had breakfast in the morning and stayed up until midnight last night, his need when he arrives at my class is to take a nap and eat something. He is not ready to learn. Compared to the child who went to bed at eight and had a healthy breakfast in the morning, the previous student is already set up for failure in the current system we have. This country does not at all address the relationship between poverty and learning.
Later on, during the program, the host opened up the telephone lines for people to call in to the station. A caller from San Francisco questioned how districts are able to maintain good teachers if there is a seniority policy in place.
While other workforces reward people by merit the education workforce go with how long you’ve serviced as a teacher. You can’t rise to the top in that manner. Apparently in the past there were discrepancies in pay. Men were paid more than women and those who taught high school were paid more than those in elementary, so seniority was put into place. Personally, my opinion is that so as long as seniority is in place the teacher will never be considered a professional but just an ordinary service provider.
There are ways to establish fairness in the system that would prevent problems in how teachers are paid. It could be written in policy or contract or education code. Having seniority also makes it difficult to recruit highly qualified teachers for specific fields. There is an incredible shortage of teachers in special education. By having those teachers paid more for their expertise, districts would be able to recruit and retain high quality teachers in that subject area.
I do observe differences in the amount of work put in at various grade levels. Some teachers give it all, staying late every day, paying for their own professional development every year, becoming members of certain councils or educational groups, and reading up on educational trends. These teachers try to perfect their craft. While others get to work on time and leave right on time, haven’t had an professional development in the past few years and do not read up on anything or belong to any professional organization. Some teachers kick their students out of class on a daily basis for behavior problems. While others spend time researching and developing ways to connect to the child and his/her family, seeking resources to assist in developing a successful student. Yes!!!! Teachers are different from one another and a merit system should be implemented BUT WITH A LOT OF CARE!
When addressing class size reduction (CSR) each on the panel had different opinions. In my observation and experience working in intermediate and primary grades, I think that CSR benefits teachers with regards to classroom management. Primarily in kindergarten and first grade, many students are experiencing what it’s like to be in school for the first time. Students are easily distracted and benefit from small group instruction as they assimilate to the institution of education. Additionally, our classrooms are very diverse in that we service students identified with disabilities and English learners. As an educator there is a difference having CSR in these grades. However, I believe that it’s manageable having a class size of 30 to 35 students in higher grades such as 2nd through 6th. Surely, there will be some students who will struggle in large groups, but they are fewer than most and if you have good classroom management skills you can address their learning style in a small group intervention.
Reporting from Fifi’s head and heart, I wish all success in the trying years to come. Please leave any comments, insights or stories to share of your own.
