What do Schools need to Succeed?

What makes schools succeed?  We typically measure the success of a school through standardized tests and graduation rates.  These measures help the community at large determine whether a school is successful or not, but what helps a school succeed?  I’m sure many would argue that schools succeed because of time spent in the classroom and the quality of the teacher, among other things.  I don’t deny that these factors are important, but I believe that schools could be even more successful if they had more autonomy, if there was more collaboration and cooperation among and between teachers and students, and if the school had a culture and climate that focused on students. 

If every school had autonomy to make their own decisions, and had strong leadership to make good decisions, I believe our schools would be much more successful.  For seven years I taught in a school that had autonomy.  We were able to make all our own financial and curricular decisions.  We thought about the current student body, and made decisions based on what our students needed.  We didn’t have to use textbooks and we didn’t have to do what every other school around us was doing.  We developed our own curricula to meet the needs of our students, and our students were successful.  Success can be seen as evidenced by test scores (http://arch.k12.hi.us/PDFs/ssir/2011/charter/SSIR149-C.pdf) and I believe the progress we made as a school was because of the local power the school had. 

I take this experience and compare it to my current position.  I work in a traditional school district where the superintendent or other district administrators must approve almost all curricular changes that teachers want to make prior to changes being made.  Even my principal lacks power to make certain changes.  Schools aren’t allowed to decide what materials are best to meet their students’ needs, the decision needs to be based on what’s best for the district, even if the needs of the school are different.  My school is currently labeled as a focus school, a new label in Michigan as part of NCLB.  Even though we need to make changes to help our lower achievers be more successful, we have so many hoops to jump through that I’m not sure if/when changes will be made.  If we had autonomy to make our own decisions, we might be able to reach more of our students.  Autonomy is so important that an entire section of this paper has been devoted to it.  After looking at many different schools and examining different factors, the authors find that schools with autonomy tend to perform better than schools that don’t have autonomy.   Giving autonomy to schools allows schools to develop and assess students on their curricula and make appropriate adjustments so that students succeed.  Meier (2002) and his staff believe in autonomy so much that they recommend “Decisions about curriculum, pedagogy, and scheduling … be made by on-site professionals” (p. 65).  This needs to become a common practice in our schools.

Eisner (2001) argues that if we want our students to be successful, we need to teach them how to have quality conversations.  Since conversing is a skill that is needed in almost all aspects of a person’s life, we need to teach students how to talk with one another.  When students are able to talk about issues, both curricular and non-curricular, they build their critical thinking skills (Eisner, 2001).  When we teach our students how to have discussions (like in this lesson plan on literature circles) we give them conversational strategies, teach them how to relate to others, and how to organize their thoughts.  If students can articulate their thoughts verbally, they will also have an easier time writing down their thoughts and they will be able to process more difficult material.    

Conversations are also important when thinking about teachers.   Teachers need to have opportunities to talk with one another- about students, lessons, and everyday school business.  If teachers have built in collaboration time, when they can discuss curricular issues, schools are more likely to end up with an aligned curriculum.  Schools will likely be more successful if teachers have time to visit each other’s classrooms, talk about and reflect on teaching styles, and provide each other with feedback and support (Meier, 2002).  Our students will be more successful when teachers have opportunities to collaborate and improve their instruction.  

Lastly, and probably most importantly, schools will succeed when they have a positive culture and climate.  Schools need to be small with small class sizes so that teachers have the opportunity to know their students well- academically and personally (Meier, 2002). When a school has a strong and positive culture, students can surpass many expectations.  Baruti Kafele is a principal in New Jersey who has turned around a poor performing high school.  He has established high expectations along with respect for and knowledge of all of his students.  When students feel cared for and acknowledged they are willing to rise to high expectations.  This video provides a glimpse at how Kafele has shaped the culture of his school.   In the book Transforming School Culture,  (Muhammad, 2009) school culture is described as “the set of norms, values, and beliefs, rituals and ceremonies, symbols and stories that make up the ‘persona’ of a school” (p. 12).  Schools that have a strong culture and communicate the expectations, values, and beliefs to students are more likely to see their students succeed.  Students know when they are cared about and when their teachers are looking out for their best interest.  If the school can support each student, then students will push themselves to meet the expectations because they know they won’t be working on their own. 

If schools had the ability to make autonomous decisions, worked to build collaboration with students and teachers, and established a school culture that encouraged and supported students, our schools would be successful.  While we may have to measure success based on test scores, that shouldn’t be our only measuring stick.  If schools can work together to provide students with the skills they need as individuals and provide all of the support needed for students to achieve, then we have truly helped our students succeed.  The success of schools needs to be measured not only by test scores, but also on how schools work together internally to support their students. 

References:

Eisner, E.  (2001).  What does it mean to say a school is doing well?  Phi Delta Kappan,

82 (5): 367-372. 

Meier, D.  (2002).  Chapter 3.  The Power of their Ideas:  Lessons for America from a

Small School in Harlem.  Boston, MA: Beacon Press

Muhammad, A.  (2009).  Transforming School Culture:  How to Overcome Staff

Division.  Bloomington, IN:  Solution Tree Press. 

What's important when teaching character education?

Morals relate to the principals of right and wrong behavior (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral).  In the context of schools, I feel that students should learn to be respectful, tolerant, cooperative, and responsible for their words and actions.  When considering a teacher’s responsibility in teaching morals to students, teachers should serve as models of moral behavior and need to teach expected behaviors explicitly.  Students also need to discuss moral issues to develop their own understandings and viewpoints of critical issues.  Most importantly, a relationship needs to be established between the teacher and students in order for learning to be successful. 

            Modeling is important when teaching moral behaviors (Noddings, 2002).  If students see teachers acting morally, they are more likely to replicate those actions.  Students can also be models for each other.  The more often a student sees positive behaviors, the more likely he/she is to engage in similar behaviors.  Teacher modeling is important, but I believe that student modeling is even more important and is more effective in changing behavior.  Students want to be like their peers.  This is one of the reasons my school uses videos of student behavior to affect overall behavior.  As part of our Positive Behavior Support system, we use models as a way of instruction.  About every two weeks, a new teacher/student video is sent out to the faculty to share with their students.  The videos show students and faculty modeling appropriate classroom, bathroom, and playground behavior.  Because students are involved in making the videos, they have more buy-in in repeating the positive behaviors.  Students are able to see their friends and peers in the videos and are more willing to use positive behaviors as well.  Other schools have used this method as well.  This video shows students acting respectfully in the library and includes an explanation of the positive behavior.  When students see their peers in videos like these, they are more likely to emulate that same behavior.

             

            Explicit instruction is another key element when teaching morals.  Noddings (2002) contends that students need to practice in order to develop morals.  In order to practice, students need to be taught explicitly what their behaviors should look like.  If we expect our students to meet specific expectations and to work with others, we need to teach students what the behaviors look like.  We cannot rely solely on modeling because there are nuances to behaviors that students may not pick up. We need to explain to students what working collaboratively looks like and sounds like.   We can also use the curriculum to help support the teaching of morals.  Texts provide numerous examples of people acting morally or immorally.  When we use these texts to talk to and teach students about moral behaviors, they are able to see many examples of the behaviors in practice.  Concepts become more concrete and less abstract, making them easier to understand and implement.  TRIBES is a program that focuses on character education using explicit instruction.  Students learn morals through direct teacher instruction and active engagement in character-focused activities.  Students have the opportunity to practice and explain what they have learned using the lessons. 

Explicit behaviors should not only be taught and modeled, but students should also discuss morals.  Noddings (2002) considers discussion to be the most critical element in teaching morals.  These discussions promote “disciplined, open-minded, and critical” thinking which increases dialogue between students and faculty (Haydon, 2005).  When students have the opportunity to discuss morals, they learn how to clearly formulate and articulate their ideas.  Students also have the opportunity to challenge others’ ideas and learn about different viewpoints.  Discussion about morals can lead to greater understanding and accepting of those who are different.  Discussions can “promote the development of respect, willingness to listen and tolerance” (Haydon, 2005).  Discussing controversial issues also help students learn how to support their opinions with evidence and analyze others’ positions (Noddings, 2002).  This helps students think more critically and helps them organize their thoughts clearly and succinctly. 

            The last component of moral education is the most important.  In order to model and teach effectively, teachers need to have strong connections with their students.  Students need to know that their teachers care about and listen to them.  Building relationships between teachers and students is a main component of the care ethics ideal.  “Students must believe that the adults in their schools and communities care about them” (Noddings, 2002).  When students know that they are cared for, they are generally more willing to learn and are receptive to new ideas.  If we want to teach our students how to act morally, we need to connect with them and provide support so that they know they will be successful with anything they attempt.  They will see the value in respecting others because they have been shown respect from the adults that work with them.  This article from ASCD not only explains the history of character education, but also emphasizes the importance of building relationships with students while teaching morals.  It states, “Moral education that is merely intellectual misses the crucial emotional side of character, which serves as the bridge between judgment and action” (Likona, 1993).  Teaching values is not enough; we need to connect with our students in order to make a long-term difference.   

References:

Haydon, G. 2005. Moral Education. Randall Curren (ed.) A Companion to the Philosophy

of Education. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Noddings, N. 2002. Chapters 1-3. Educating Moral Persons. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Inclusion for All

            The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandates that as often as possible, students with disabilities

are educated with children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (idea.ed.gov).

Though this is a federal law, it has been interpreted and implemented in many different ways.  Many of these differences are based on personal opinion about how often and to what extent special education students should be in their regular education classrooms.  I believe that all children should have the opportunity to interact with their general education peers.  What that looks like however, should vary from student to student, and there should be no formula or protocol for teams to follow when making that decision.

            Special Education students should be in their regular classroom as often as appropriate.  It is as simple as that.  Certainly, there are students for whom their regular classroom isn’t appropriate but I would argue that often there is some point in the day when all students, no matter how disabled, could participate with their non-disabled peers.  Even students with significant behavioral or medical needs should have opportunities to interact with their classmates.  The time may be short and/or granted with numerous supports in place.  The student may have to earn time with his/her peers.  No matter what the situation, all students should have the opportunity to interact with their classmates.  The difference is the extent to which the interaction occurs- what is appropriate for students with mild difficulties is likely very different from students with significant disabilities.  Any placement decision needs to be made on an individual basis, and needs to be based on the students’ needs.    

            First, we will examine students with mild to moderate disabilities.  These are generally students who have learning disabilities, speech and language impairments, or are high functioning students with autism.  Students in this category often need additional academic or behavioral support to succeed in the classroom and require specific, individualized instruction that can be best provided in a special education setting, usually a resource room.  Students should only be pulled out of their classroom when it is absolutely necessary, otherwise they should be in their regular classroom with accommodations.  The typical resource room model pulls students out of their class to receive specialized instruction usually in reading, writing, and/or math.  The students then return to their classroom for instruction in science, social studies, and all of their specials.  They also participate in lunch and recess.  To claim that inclusion should not be allowed or is not beneficial for these students is ignorant.  Students with mild to moderate disabilities should be included because they are able to participate with their general education peers in almost all parts of their school day.  This process may be challenging, as referenced in this article in the New York Times, but the benefits students receive by being with their peers outweighs any challenge the teacher is faced with by having to provide accommodations. 

            When working with students with severe disabilities priorities may change, but inclusion is still beneficial.  According to Arnold and Dodge (1994), the team needs to determine whether the “essential elements” of the curriculum can be achieved when a student participates in general education classroom.  Sometimes it is not in the student’s best interests to participate in their regular classroom.  Other times, though, it is completely appropriate, but for non-academic purposes.  In cases where the general education curriculum will be too difficult for a student, even with accommodations, the team needs to look at how else the student can benefit.  “Academic achievement is not the only purpose of mainstreaming” (Arnold & Dodge, 1994); some students benefit from the social aspects of the classroom.  The regular education classroom allows students to interact with their non-disabled peers.  At minimum students with disabilities can practice their social skills and students without disabilities learn about compassion and acceptance as they get to know someone who is “different.”  Inclusion is advantageous for the students with and without disabilities.  Kids Together, Inc has created a list of ways in which inclusion is beneficial for all involved.  There are obvious benefits for including students with different abilities; when we exclude students with disabilities from the classroom we affect their learning and we do our other students a great disservice because they lack opportunities to interact with others who aren’t the same as them. 

            When working with students with significant disabilities, it is important to keep an open mind.  Some people believe students with significant disabilities should not be included in the regular education setting.  I believe there are ways to modify any curriculum so that all students can participate, though the level of participation and type of activity may look different.  When teaching a unit on communities, the special education teacher for my school and I used pictures to help our non-verbal student participate in the lessons.  Yes, his attention was shorter than my other students, and no he wasn’t doing the same work as my other students, but it was similar enough that he could participate and learn just like the rest of his peers.  Math and language arts activities can be modified as well.  Even if the rest of the class is working on multiplication, if a student can quietly work on counting or addition, that student should be able to join the class for math.  Independent reading time is a great time for inclusion because students are generally reading a wide variety of texts anyway, the student with disabilities would be reading a book at his/her level and not at grade level.  Reading while everyone else is reading would not cause any sort of disruption. 

            I can think of very few situations in which a student with disabilities would not interact at all with his/her non-disabled peers.  While it is part of IDEA and schools are legally mandated to oblige, I think that inclusion benefits all students and schools should work to include their special education students in as much of the school day as possible.  As Arnold and Dodge write, “The biggest benefit will come when disabled students feel they ‘belong’” (1994).  It is our job to include our special needs students in their general education classroom so that they can belong. 

References:

Arnold and Dodge, Ange.  ‘Is Full Inclusion of Disabled Students Desirable?’ from

Taking sides:  Clashing views on educational issues (11^th ed.).  J.W. Noll (ed.), pp. 242-255 (New York: Dushkin/McGraw-Hill).