Expert Teachers, the #1 Reason Kids Succeed

Recently I've been reading some research that pertains to the effects on student achievement of pre-packaged programs and curriculum designs that are being sold to schools across the world. Program A claims to raise student achievement higher and faster than ever before, while Program B makes the same claims. Sometimes these programs do make positive gains on achievement (usually measured by standardized and/or norm referenced tests).

The first few years of my doctoral studies have been focused on looking deeper at the negative aspects of business models in schools, of pre-packaged programs (Success For All and DNG to name a few), and of what actually has the most profound impact on student learning in the long term. It's a hard thing to study, because as a teacher-researcher I've decried standardized testing as inherently unequal and inaccurate. Of course the current studies, some of the best I've ever read, agree with this, but go a few steps further.

To put it quite simply, these articles, that I won't name here yet, because that's not the point of my discussion here, claim that the single biggest factor on student learning is quality teaching. Of course, quality teaching is almost impossible to define because it means different things to different students.

This is something I've tried to keep in mind every day when I enter the classroom. There's 28 young kids in my classroom, and what works for him may not work for her and so on. In the current era of test reform, rigorous political factors, and money being put at a higher level of importance than kids, it's hard for teachers to ever reach the level of teaching students, they're so focused on teaching content and teaching tests that they are afraid that actually *gasp* teaching to their students needs will be seen as subversive. I can confirm this, in my short five-year career, I've focused on teaching students and have been considered quite the rebel because of this.

I hope to continue looking at and pegging down indicators of great teaching, and hopefully researching it more in depth some day. If we can define it, if we can prove that it serves the best interests of children and scores them proficient on those ridiculous standardized tests, there might be a compromise out there that actually hands the reins of education to teachers while keeping the politicians at bay.

No Child Left Behind, in the Words of Other Professionals

No Child Left Behind continues to loom over public education here in the United States. I think about the law a lot, I have written numerous (unpublished) papers on the topic, and am definitely an advocate against it. I have talked with President Obama's Administration twice on the matter (not that they really listened to me), once at a conference and once through an e-mail exchange. As a parent, I think No Child Left Behind hurts because it means that my son has to sit in the classroom and have the pressure of the law put on his shoulders. As a teacher, it puts the wrong focus on my job and forces me to do things that do not teach students, they teach them to test.

I've discussed this many times, so today, for those of you who are interested in hearing a little more, I'm going to throw a Youtube video titled "No Child Left Behind: Truths and Consequences." It's around 9 minutes long, but has some interesting information that I think most teachers could agree with. So here it is:

The Adult Literacy Experience in the High School Classroom

When I say adult literacy, I guess I could also be talking about college level literacy, because often times, the literature used is more on the adult edge than anything else (although I encountered a number of books that I now consider to be young adult literature in undergraduate level courses).

The most enjoyable college literature courses for me were always the special topics courses. The way I believe it works at NMSU is there is a course called ENGL 211, which is basically books across a topic chosen by the instructor. When I took it, we read science fiction by female authors (you know, Frankenstein and stuff like that). I like the idea of forming a class around a genre, or a very specific topic, and moving forward from there.

For example, I have been a fan of dystopia (the opposite of utopia) themed literature. Books like 1984, A Brave New World, and even down into children's books like The Giver and The City of Ember. Imagine in a high school lit/comp class, instead of reading books like Wuthering Heights and Lord of the Flies (both classics in their own rights, but ultimately books I never felt a connection with as a 17 year old high school student), surveying the class (or even making the decision yourself, as a teacher), and reading books across that specific theme that's chosen. I would have been reading day and night if my senior English class was themed around zombie literature (OK, too much of a stretch?) or even historic fiction out of a certain period, say the Civil War or World War II.

Basically, look at it this way. As a teacher, what are your interests? You'd be surprised how just showing what you're interested in, letting your passion for that subject come to the surface, and sharing your knowledge can change the way students think about that topic. I'm quite interested in World War II and am passionate about some of the books I choose to read to my 5th graders, and many, if not most of my students end up sharing that passion and interest. It's just a continuing step in taking back the field of education, throwing down the test preparation materials, and doing what we should have been doing all along, teaching with passion and interest, teaching students to really learn about the world instead of teaching them to fill in bubbles on a test sheet.

Why I've Decided That the DRA Just Isn't Good

Maybe the title of this post could have been differently worded, but it's not. I think that the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), compared to other diagnostics, is decent (not worth something like $250 per kit), but is ultimately just another stupid diagnostic. Why have I come to this decision? It's rather simple actually.

I like to read. Reading is great, there is nothing better than a good book. I don't really care if it's a popular book, a bargain bin book, a book for kids, whatever, it's all good. Some I'll hate, but most are at least somewhat enjoyable.

Now, what the DRA is all about is this little books that are at reading levels. You have this box full of these 16 page books for students to read and respond to. The DRA instructions basically say that for the teacher to fully understand the results, that they should have read the book as well.

16 pages don't sound like much, but trust me, it's beyond brutal. I've always maintained more than a touch of selective ADD, when stuff doesn't interest me, I just shut down. I can't read these DRA books, it's impossible. I honestly don't know how my students get through them. They're poorly written, there's little to no attention to actual, you know, story telling.

So when your school district adopts the DRA, and hands you your first kit, try to read those books. You are truly a champion if you can pull it off, because they're not good. It goes against everything I believe about literacy instruction, basically, that it should be interesting to read. Think about it.

The DRA Problem

DRA stands for the Developmental Reading Assessment, a reading assessment program published by Pearson. The DRA is used in schools across the nation to assess student reading fluency and comprehension. This year was my first using the DRA in my classroom, as it was adopted by my school district at the end of last school year.

Of course I went through all of the trainings that came with the program (they were provided on DVD's, and my school set up a process for seeing each part and practicing the test). The DRA usually comes in a kit, which includes a set of leveled readers (that are only supposed to be used for the purposes of the assessment), teacher guides, training DVD's, and the materials the teacher needs to do the assessment and analyze the results. This comes at a cost of $150 per kit. Let me break this down for you. I work in a school district that has 25 elementary schools. My school, like most in town, ordered two English kits and one Spanish kit for every grade level. Assuming this trend held across the city, the district spent $90,000 at least on purchasing these kits.

I know that school districts have a tendency to throw money in the direction of every fad that comes down the pike, and I have always had my suspicions that this was the case with the DRA. If you're new to the DRA, are here seeking information from someone who has nothing to gain by selling you the kits, or are just curious, let me walk you through my experience and my opinions with this program.

The DRA is a scripted program where the teacher reads certain questions or statements to students, and they respond. The teacher then interprets student answers according to a rubric, and, taken with their fluency score and their miscues, they either score at that level, or need to move up/down depending on their score.

So there's the DRA for you. Now, for me, at the beginning of the year, having already seen my kids work for a few weeks, I thought the DRA gave an inflated view of how the students were actually performing. This is a trend that continued all year long, it wasn't entirely consistent with my own observations or assessments that I used to inform my teaching (you know, REAL assessments).

There are many issues I have with the DRA:

• First of all, I am always hesitant to use scripted programs, they serve mainly to assess learning that serves students well on the standardized test, and I have big problems with this.
• Next, this very expensive program did not give me any information that I could not have gotten by myself, for free, using my own skill as a teacher-researcher (that's a whole other problem itself, the fact that teachers aren't trusted even though they're the experts).
• I also am not a huge fan of pre/mid/post tests, that is, tests that are given only a few times per year, as they really can't serve to be assessments that inform learning and instruction in the short term.
• If you use the test much more often than four or five times a year, students will have seen so many of the leveled readers that it will become invalid.
• There is no student buy-in on this test. I've found that my students aren't interested in the small texts that come with the program, and they don't really feel the connection between the results and them.
• For students above grade level, this test won't serve them after a year or two. I've seen third graders 'max out' the program, which means we can't give it to them in fourth or fifth grade, because they're done.

There are some of my issues with the DRA. I can tell you, quite honestly, that if you really want to assess literacy learning, there are better ways to do it that won't cost you $150 per classroom. That is a ridiculous cost, and for schools to continue to scrape by while spending money on these fad programs just doesn't make sense.

When You've Got To Slow Down

Here we are, late April, finally. The end is near, here in New Mexico, it's now less than four weeks away. That means a few things. First of all, it means that we're running out of time, but it also probably means that students are having a little difficulty staying focused, most teachers are starting to drag a little bit, and administration is still breathing down everyone's neck, does that sound about right?

Well, if your state is anything like New Mexico, you might have some lag time between your standardized testing and the end of the year. We take it to extremes here, taking the test over 10 school weeks before the end of the year, yes 10. That means that the pressure is in full gear up until the last week of February. The testing then takes place for two weeks, and the last 10 weeks, most of March (with Spring Break mixed in there), April, and May coming after the storm.

For me, this is a golden opportunity to do some actual teaching and let my kids actually learn (let's stop it with all this essential learning, back to basics nonsense, I'm talking about those 'nice to know' things that all teachers wish they had time to teach).

In terms of literacy, this means more self selection, more multimedia tie ins, more long discussions, and more chances to take risks on some new and untested books.

We've lost touch with our students so much that it sickens me. School has been reduced to numbers, students nothing but test scores and labels of advanced, proficient, nearing proficient, or beginning step. It's ridiculous, we need to stop patting ourselves on the back every time a kid goes up two percentage points on the test, and start patting ourselves on the back when a kid pulls a book off the shelf for fun or because they're interested, that's what it's all about, everything else is nonsense.