February 4, 2013 By 1 Comment

Common Core: What We Have Here is a Learnable Moment

By Lesley Hagelgans

Within the district where I work, the Common Core State Standards were shared with Math and Science teachers in January 2011 – just six short months after the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices approved them.  The information provided by the administration within my district was complimented by research shared at the Gates Convene especially from groups like America Achieves.  My participation in the Gates Convene was an enriching opportunity to learn about what is going on in all aspects of education reform including the Common Core State Standards and related assessment consortiums.

As I was reacquainted with the Smarter Balance assessments last week, I was thinking about teachers who haven’t even seen the Common Core State Standards yet.  The Common Core State Standards were passed in Washington, D.C. in June of 2010, and many teachers will have their evaluations tied to assessments that evaluate student success with the Common Core in spring of 2014.  Why does information take years to trickle down through bureaucratic structures before it lands in the hands of the people it will arguably affect most – teachers?

As recently as last year, I have met teachers from across the country that are not familiar with the Common Core State Standards for various reasons.  I teach in a small school district with limited resources where much of the curriculum design lands in the capable hands of teachers.  I am aware that larger school districts with huge transient populations employ professionals to write assessments and units tied to the Common Core; this information is shared with staff at a convenient time for reforming curriculum whole scale.  Both limited resources and large bureaucratic structures have been cited as reasons for teachers lacking awareness.

What we have here is a learnable and teachable moment.

  • On a systemic level, let’s look at the schools where the Common Core has been integrated and share what works and what does not.
  • As teachers, we need to use our time for sharing resources and strategies to meet the new literacy demands instead of simply lamenting them.
  • Both administrators and teachers need to find ways of replacing something they already do instead of feeling the drain of doing one more thing.
  • Everyone should use platforms like VIVA Teachers, America Achieves, and Hope Street Group to share and retrieve information that will help students be successful.

One last thing, I challenge the Department of Education to study where the Common Core thrives.  Do students excel when the Common Core State Standards land directly in the hands of those teachers who derive their own unit plans tied to common assessments linked to the Common Core or is success better nourished in those districts where teachers had less of a hand in the instructional design but a bounty of professional development to help them teach units and lessons designed by others?

Lesley Hagelgans teaches Language Arts at Marshall Middle School in Marshall, Michigan. She was a member of the National VIVA Task Force.

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , ,
January 31, 2013 By 13 Comments

Teacher prep: Let’s get clinical

by James Kobialka

Teaching is not a profession which can be taught through lectures and reports. Just  as doctors must be trained in hospitals, in practices, so must teachers be trained in classrooms in what is called the clinical model of teacher preparation.

I remember student teachers coming into my high school class. They would sit at the back of the class, scribbling in notebooks. After two weeks of this, they’d teach one lesson and disappear, presumably off to present a signed form and get a degree.

I finished my own teaching degree in May of 2011. I spent well over 300 hours teaching. I designed lessons, units, and curricula. I watched others teach. I videotaped classes; I wrote reflections; I received critiques; I did research; I earned my degree with ink and tears, as did the rest of my cohort.

I feel privileged to have been taught by great teachers. Every step of the way I was supported and challenged.

Not everyone made it. Some quit. They couldn’t hack the long hours and the stress of teaching. While I feel for them, I also am thankful. Their leaving did not hurt students – if they had burned out in their first year of teaching, it would be a different story.

Those of us who graduated did so knowing who we were – not as people, but as educators. We had a feel for our classroom persona, our strengths and weaknesses, our goals.

A lot of eyes are turning towards teacher preparation right now. 25 state school chiefs recently agreed to “take action” towards renovating their states’ teacher licensure and preparation programs.

Their recent report identified “Licensure” as a main area to change. I hope they will focus on the clinical model of teacher preparation that mimics how doctors are trained.

The state chiefs aren’t the only people asking these questions. How do we train good teachers? How do we know whether a first-year teacher will have a high- or low- performing classroom? How do we train what TNTP called the “irreplaceables”?

Here are your answers:

Stop hiring people who worked in industry for fifteen years and think that qualifies them to teach high schoolers.

Stop hiring subs who have been in the system for ten years but never designed their own lesson.

Stop hiring people who majored in Education but have never stood in front of a class.

Call up Clark University, my alma mater. Call up the Urban Teacher Residency United. Call up any of a long list of schools. . Ask them which of their recent graduates need a job – because many of us still do.

Start hiring people with classroom experience. Start hiring people with portfolios, with lessons, who can show you videos and student work samples. Hire people who know their weaknesses as educators and are willing to improve them.

Learn from the programs that work. Stop sending low-performing teachers to endless Professional Development lectures; set them up with a mentor instead. Have them reflect, read, write, and think – just like we want our youth to.

I wouldn’t trust a doctor who has never been in a hospital. I would never trust a pilot who hasn’t flown.

So why do we think we can trust teachers who’ve never been in front of a class?

James Kobialka teaches Science and English in Worcester, MA

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,
January 28, 2013 By 3 Comments

Teacher Talk on School Climate: Armed and Pedagogical?

By Kori Milroy

The recent Sandy Hook school massacre has brought about a nationwide focus on school safety and security.  Ideas for improving security range from an across the board ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, to placing an armed guard in every school building.  Some groups have called for teachers and/or administrators to be armed with guns or Tasers. What do teachers think about all this? [Click to download]  Are they ready and willing to be armed?  The nation’s two largest teachers’ unions released a statement opposing arming teachers, but some teachers have embraced the idea, filling up free firearms training sessions being offered in Ohio, Utah, and Texas.

On this episode of Teacher Talk, Chicago Public Schools teachers Conor Fitzsimmons and Jennifer Christiansen share their opinions on school safety and security, and the prospect of teachers carrying guns. Download the episode here or stream it below. to listen in on Kori, Conor’s, and Jennifer’s conversation about the vision, and add your own voice to the mix by leaving a comment here on the VIVA Teachers website, below this post.


This is the third installment of Teacher Talk, an ongoing series of conversations between teachers talking about education policy.
Filed Under: Podcasts, Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,
January 24, 2013 By 2 Comments

Why rely on Test Companies, Instead of Teachers, to Create Assessments?

By Jessica Choi

Joshua Starr, superintendent of Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) which consistently ranks in U.S. News and World Report’s top 100 high schools, recently said that “a good way to create assessments for Common Core-aligned curriculum would be to crowd-source the development and let teachers design them rather than have corporations do it.”

Why is this a revolutionary idea?

Teachers assess students every day. Why weren’t teachers the obvious choice to write the Common Core assessments? Don’t we trust teachers to create quality tests?

Teachers CAN Write Quality Tests
While teaching for MCPS, I was hired to help write the ESOL 4 semester exams. It was an honor.

Teachers from different backgrounds, different levels of teaching experience, and different teaching styles came together over the summer to create the end of semester exams. We were trained and had an advisor who kept us on track. We studied the standards and worked in teams to develop questions for each of the standards. The hardest part was developing questions that would be fair to students of different races, different socio-economic statuses, and students with special needs.  In our group, there were teachers who taught each of those populations, so we worked together to modify questions so that they would be fair for all of our students.

Revision is the Most Important Part
The test went through editing and a formal review process before it was given to students. After the first administration of the test, teachers were asked to send their students’ results for each question and any comments or suggestions they had to the test facilitator.

Maybe ESOL teachers are just super-awesome (as I have often suspected), but I think this would happen in other departments too: ESOL teachers loved giving feedback on the exams. That year and every year after, teachers offered lots of comments, corrections, and suggestions for new questions. Teachers felt empowered because they were not just being told what to do; their professional opinion was being respected.

Although the test writers had done everything we could have to make a fair and balanced test, when the test was administered teachers found questions that were not fair. Those questions were dismissed from the students’ final scores and they were revised for the following year’s test.

How do corporations revise their test questions each year? All the secrecy surrounding test creation means that teachers (the test administrators) are never asked what problems they observed or how they would revise the test for the following year. This seems like a missed opportunity for creating a truly fair and balanced assessment.

Crowd-sourcing Teachers
Teachers are essential to test revision. After every administration of the Common Core assessments, teachers should be asked for comments and corrections so that the questions can be revised appropriately.

Teachers could also be an indispensable part of test creation. Teachers could choose the best questions written by test companies for each standard or they could write their own questions for the assessments.

Giving teachers a voice in the tests they have to administer motivates them to take ownership of the assessments and of their outcomes.

Crowd-sourcing Students
Students could also create good questions for the Common Core assessments if given the right directions and incentives.

Teachers often ask students to write sample test questions to review for tests. Sometimes teachers use the questions students have written as the real test questions. I think students would create appropriate questions if awards were given for the best ones.

If students write the questions, then teachers could choose the best ones for each standard.

The Role of Test Companies
Test companies should serve as a facilitator. We need an outside company to manage the technology, analyze the data, choose the final questions and keep the final product a secret before the test.

But test companies currently operate in an academic utopia where they create assessments based on how students should interpret questions. Tests need to be written by teachers who have a better understanding of how students will interpret questions.

What do you think? Could students and teachers create better assessments than corporations?

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
January 23, 2013 By 3 Comments

The Myths of School Closings

We might have a genuine opportunity here in Chicago to learn from our decades-long effort to raise the floor in our public schools by “closing” tens of schools and replacing them, often in the same building with the same kids, with “new schools.” The Commission on School Utilization gives all of us an opportunity to deepen the understanding about what happens to students, teachers and a neighborhood when a school is “closed,

What we have here is a failure to genuinely communicate and a chance to change that. In my personal experience everyone new in the building means you have lost years of experience and knowledge and social capital, people who know how to handle the minutiae and the mundane of running a complex ship. We spent that first year reinventing every wheel you could possibly think of: testing protocols, how to manage advisory, bell schedules, how to handle truancy, how to program students, how to manage security, how to handle discipline, how to handle tardies, how to handle parents, how to handle the students who are pregnant and parenting, how to handle 18 year old students who have 2 credits, how to handle the students who just got out of jail, how to handle 30% plus special education population, how to handle angry kids and angry parents, how to handle depressed and hungry and homeless kids, how to handle staff meetings, how to handle professional development, how to handle external and community partnerships, how to handle service learning, as well as the pressures of the Chicago Board of Education and visitors and Principal for a Day.

CPS loses students because we push out kids instead of instituting indispensable programs such as Restorative Justice and wraparound services that these students need to help them build skills.

You want parental involvement? Study the schools that have parent resource centers and successful models of welcoming, supportive culture
for parents, and spend time on making that happen system wide.

The fact is, it’s not an exaggeration that in some Chicago neighborhoods, schools are the main community asset. We have to build on that asset if we are going to begin to address the other challenges facing these neighborhoods and their residents. Instead of “closing” and “opening” schools year in and year out, we need to take a broader, longer term approach to making sure we are making all schools work. Study what works! Make it happen in every school, not piecemeal and only if a school is lucky and has a high functioning administration. Make parents feeling welcome and a part of the school a highly valued metric, especially in high school.

The Commission on School Utilization may be our last chance to get this right. There’s a lot of “transformation” fatigue out here. Let’s not waste this chance.

The author teaches art in the Chicago Public Schools.

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
January 22, 2013 By 1 Comment

Teacher Evaluation Update: No Deal in New York City

by Mark Anderson

In my last post here, I expressed my loss of confidence in the leadership of both Mayor Bloomberg and UFT President Mulgrew. The failure of both sides to broker an agreement on teacher evaluations has only exacerbated my disapproval. But it is not simply that they have failed to reach an agreement that irks me; it is that both sides seem most concerned with exigencies of administration, rather than factors that will influence change in the place that needs it the most — the classroom.

As a VIVA teacher, I worked with other teachers across NY State to craft a set of recommendations on teacher evaluation in 2010. We spent some time considering what components of teacher evaluation will have the most impact on teacher growth, and thus, student learning. And we came the conclusion that the main factor was that no matter the ultimate measures and weighting, effective and meaningful feedback will only occur in the context of a professional learning community. Teachers — not simply the principal — must be empowered, as peer reviewers and facilitators of professional conversations oriented around growth and learning.

Yet all we hear from the NYC DOE has to do with principal autonomy.

We also recommended that student surveys be included as a measure of teacher effectiveness. After reviewing Ron Ferguson’s research and work with The Tripod Project and The MET Project, we were convinced that well-developed student surveys provided meaningful feedback
that would help a teacher to reflect and consider how to revise their instruction. The final findings from The MET Project have further strengthened the cause for inclusion of student surveys.

Yet the UFT will not consider inclusion of student surveys in teacher evaluations.

Both sides seem to be have gotten lost in the details and specifics of clauses, arbitration, and sunset dates without a clear vision of teacher professionalism in their minds.

Mark Anderson is a 7th and 8th grade Special Education teacher in the Bronx.

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,
January 22, 2013 By 1 Comment

Driving Lessons: Putting the Data-Driven Map in Perspective

By Kathleen Sullivan

Data is defining the self worth of our children, the value of a dedicated, compassionate caring teacher, and the marketability of our homes. Data has proven to be invaluable as a tool to identify weak spots in curriculum and also as a way to identify students in need of academic intervention. But with the focus on data, something else happened. Education leaders, administrators, and teachers stopped talking about students as individuals; instead we began to hold data meetings and we started to refer to students simply as “above grade level”, “at grade level”, “progressing, but below grade level”, or “needs improvement”. At the same time, new students test scores began to be the first thing we checked to see how their scores would affect overall data for the upcoming testing season

Michelle Rhee of StudentsFirst, an aggressive education reform organization, appears to believe the only way to measure student and teacher success is through test scores. StudentsFirst recently released a report grading states on how they are working to elevate the teaching profession, empower parents, spend wisely, and govern well. Florida and Louisiana were at the top of the list. The problem is that the initiatives being promoted by StudentsFirst sounds great in theory but education reform goes well beyond test scores and data.

We need an education reality check. I recently “liked” a Facebook posting that read “I Care More About the Person My Students Become Than The Scores On The Tests They Take”. This doesn’t mean I don’t care about test scores and data. It does mean that society needs people who have integrity and character. Test scores are important as a way of measuring what students are learning. Does it measure smart? What does smart mean? Does it strictly mean a high test score? Personally, I think data and test scores are part of the puzzle. Students can explain a concept but often can’t write it. Students can demonstrate a concept by creating a project but they may not be able to read a word or understand a word on a standardized test and lose points.

We need to broaden the way we think about and use data so we can make sure we’re giving each student what they need to succeed. Some students need extra academic supports to increase their capacity to learn. Students with learning, physical, and emotional disorders also need special supports.

If we invest in supporting our children academically and emotionally, we will invest in children who can not only answer questions right but also can face challenges and seek solutions. Let’s figure out how to measure those skills too.

Kathleen Sullivan teaches 5th grade science at a public school in Malden, Massachusetts.

Filed Under: Teacher Blog Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
January 16, 2013 By Leave a Comment

VIVA Teachers and MTA in Worcester Telegram

State teachers’ union sets educational goals

Report targets achievement gaps

By Jacqueline Reis, Telegram and Gazette Staff
The Massachusetts Teachers Association, the largest teachers union in the state, has released recommendations from teachers about narrowing achievement gaps in Gateway Cities such as Worcester, Fitchburg and Leominster.
Gateway Cities are the 24 communities with populations between 35,000 and 250,000 and income and education attainment levels below the state average. The report also includes input from teachers in Cambridge and Somerville.

The six recommendations are:

• Have all students learn a second language to fluency, starting in kindergarten, and adjust MCAS rules to give English language learners more time before they must take the test.

• Reduce student suspensions to all but the most egregious offenses, end zero-tolerance policies, create supervised spaces within schools where students can refocus rather than being sent to the office, and develop programs that reward positive behavior and evaluate disruptive students for special needs.

• Ensure all teachers are prepared to teach diverse students and have the autonomy to apply their skills in their classrooms.

• Strengthen school-community relationships by designating an educator to serve as a community liaison and by creating schools that stay open beyond school hours to serve the community, including new immigrants.

• Lengthen the school day and reorganize the school year to better serve students.

• Encourage Gateway Cities to collaborate and jointly seek grants.

Click here to read the rest of this article

Filed Under: Press Coverage, VIVA in the News Tagged With: , , , ,
January 15, 2013 By Leave a Comment

Press Release on VIVA Report from Massachusetts Teacher Assocation

Classroom teachers recommend ways to narrow achievement gaps in Gateway Cities

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Jan. 11, 2013
CONTACT: Laura Barrett, MTA, 617-878-8267

Download the Report

The state’s largest teachers union has released recommendations from teachers in low-income urban districts about ways to help narrow student achievement gaps, including replacing “zero tolerance” disciplinary policies that lead to high suspension rates with programs aimed at improving behavior within school settings.

The teachers’ recommendations stem from a collaborative project of the Massachusetts Teachers Association and New Voice Strategies, a nonprofit that has engaged in similar “idea exchanges” elsewhere. They are contained in a report titled “Addressing Educational Inequities: Proposals for Narrowing the Achievement Gaps in Massachusetts Gateway Cities,” which has been endorsed by the MTA.

Through the initiative, more than 300 teachers in 24 Massachusetts Gateway Cities plus Cambridge and Somerville shared their views in a freewheeling online discussion. Active participants were then asked to join a writing collaborative to craft the recommendations.

“We hope that the MTA VIVA project inspires discussions at the local level about what schools and districts can do about the critically important issues that our teachers have raised,” said MTA President Paul Toner. “The wide variety of opinions expressed during this project reminds us all that there is no single solution. Rather, there are a variety of strategies that can be effective if teachers, administrators, parents and community members all work together on behalf of students.”

The recommendations include:

  • Breaking the school-to-prison pipeline by reducing suspensions and promoting positive student behavior through in-school initiatives.
  • Offering both bilingual education and Sheltered English Immersion instruction to English Language Learners and promoting second-language fluency among native English speakers.
  • Transforming teacher preparation and professional development to address the challenges of a diverse student population.
  • Strengthening school-community relations.
  • Using flexible staffing schedules and collaboration with community-based organizations, among other methods, to lengthen the school day to provide enrichment and academic support for students and common planning time for education staff.
  • Encouraging Gateway Cities to collaborate on initiatives and jointly seek grant funding.

Gateway Cities are midsized urban centers that often serve as the “gateway” into Massachusetts for immigrant families. Many of these communities, including Holyoke, Springfield, Lawrence and Lowell, were former manufacturing centers. They have faced significant social and economic challenges since manufacturing has been in decline in the United States.

Education is often seen as the best means for building stronger economies in these communities, yet – as in Boston – student performance and graduation rates are significantly lower in Gateway Cities than in the rest of the state. For example, the five-year graduation rate for high school students is just 69 percent in Gateway Cities as opposed to 72 percent in Boston and 91 percent in the rest of the state.

One of the biggest challenges for school districts in Gateway Cities is that they serve a relatively high percentage of English Language Learners. Among other recommendations, the MTA VIVA teachers recommend a change in state law that would allow bilingual education services to be offered as well as the currently mandated Sheltered English Immersion. They also call on districts to do a better job of identifying ELL students who have learning disabilities so they can receive appropriate services at a young age. In addition, they encourage districts to provide early and effective second-language instruction to native English speakers so that they can become fluent.

On the issue of suspensions, the report recommends, “End all ‘no excuses’ or ‘zero tolerance’ disciplinary programs and policies that criminalize minor infractions of school rules and limit both in-school and out-of-school suspensions to only the most serious disruptions.”

The report also recommends strengthening school-community relations by, among other measures, extending school building hours “to allow students to have a safe place for before- and after-school activities” and establishing “home-school visitation programs,” such as one  in effect in parts of Springfield.

The authors recommend that Gateway Cities administrators work more closely together to share ideas and professional development opportunities and to apply jointly for grants.

The teacher-writers for the MTA VIVA project and the districts in which they teach are: Nancy Hilliard and James Kobialka, Worcester; Joel Patterson, Cambridge; Chelsea Mullins, Springfield; and Kathleen Sullivan, Malden. To reach any of these participants, contact Laura Barrett at MTA at 617-878-8267.

Filed Under: Current Events & Policy News Tagged With: , , , , , ,
January 15, 2013 By Leave a Comment

VIVA Teachers leader Xian Barrett in Education Week

Channel Student’s Energy to Social-Justice Projects

Commentary By Xian Barrett

Imagine your own beautiful child in a moment of anger, miscommunication, or poor judgment. Imagine if instead of a scolding, loving redirection, or a discussion of how to make better decisions, your pride and joy was handcuffed, whisked off to jail, and denied any likelihood of college or future gainful employment. In Chicago, for many parents, this is the daily reality.

On the other hand, imagine students directing that energy for youthful indiscretion toward surveying and working to improve our communities. Imagine students collaborating with other young people and allies on projects for social change. What difference could that make?

Click here to read the full commentary on Education Week

Filed Under: VIVA in the News Tagged With: , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »