Concluding Post

To: Superintendent

Plymouth-Canton Community Schools

 

I am writing this correspondence to inform you of a needed procedural change for students within our district.  The only criteria for any student’s enrollment into an Advanced Placement and/or “Honors” course should be the student’s desire to attempt the course.  Our district should reverse its policy of requiring a minimum grade point average and teacher recommendation for approval of enrollment in Advanced Placement and/or “Honors” level courses.  It is my sincerest hope you will consider this proposed change and take the necessary actions in order to make this change possible.

The importance of enacting such a drastic change to the district policy of Advanced Placement and Honors curriculum is focus on equity of access to knowledge for all students within the district.  As our district has continued to evolve, we have placed at the forefront the concept of equity within our schools.  This focus has included many district initiatives, including the program Courageous Conversations about Race, which have helped all members understand the changing social and racial demographics of our area.  We must now focus ourselves beyond the social understandings and into practical changes which reflect our commitment to equity within our schools. 

In the book Keeping Track, author Jeannie Oakes describes many problems facing education in America today.  The book focuses on the effects of the system of tracking within schools and how this system impacts students, schools, and society.  She describes, “If schooling is intended to provide access to economic, political, and social opportunity for those who are so often denied such access, school tracking appears to interfere seriously with this goal.” Oakes’s statement indicates the impact of inequitable access to knowledge for many students.  If one of our district goals is to ensure the equity in the schooling process we must seek to change our policy and process of enrollment in higher level courses.  By referencing Oakes and her work with tracking I am not suggesting that disallow our current system of Advanced Placement and Honors coursework.  However, I think her work on the impact of the access to these courses displays serious issues effecting student improvement and school culture.    

Our current system provides the individual classroom teacher with far too much power for deciding the fate students in their educational journey.  Although, I respect the teacher profession and agree that most teachers, administrators, and district personnel all work toward greater student success and achievement our current system is fundamentally flawed.  The first power of the individual teacher is they must give permission, by personal recommendation, for students wishing to enroll in higher level courses.  This allows individual teachers to essentially “track” students into lower level courses if students not given the teacher permission to enroll in high level courses.  Students wishing to challenge themselves into a higher level of academic rigor should not be stopped by a teacher forecasting how that student will perform in the future.  The teacher recommendation process is simply too subjective and allows teachers’ individual biases into the future of student academic progress.  While some teachers may have set guidelines for what they use to recommend students, others do not. 

Our current policy also implicates the teacher by the second criteria, which is the student grade point average requirement.  By only allowing students achieving a 3.0 grade point average or above the opportunity to enroll in higher level course work, our district is signaling our values of student achievement.  This practice degrades the achievements of any student underneath the threshold who wishes to challenge themselves in a higher level course.  Instead, we should encourage all students to challenge themselves academically even if they have not met a predefined grade point average threshold.  While the rationale of grade point average threshold is meant to have students given the best chance for success, the student and parent should be the stakeholders making such a decision and not teacher, administrators, or the district. 

 

Another problem with the grade point average threshold as a requirement for enrollment is the subjectivity of what an arbitrary grade actually “shows” about a student and a teacher.  With each teacher determining their own grading policy it is almost impossible to ensure fairness of acknowledgment of student performance.  A student may perform at an equal level in two different classrooms, with two different teachers, and receive different grades.  While the concept of grading policy may also be addressed at a later time, this discrepancy influences the ability of students when wishing to enroll in higher level courses.  These two problems display why teachers have far too much impact on student’s access to higher level courses and why our district must change our policy to ensure equity of access to knowledge for all students.

Although I believe the proposed change to be a positive for our students and the district, others may disagree with this plan.  The first question raised to this new concept is what happens when lowering achieving (lower grade point average) students wish to take a higher level course?  How can they be successful in higher level courses if they have already struggled in lower level courses?  The answer to the first question is that all students should be provided the description of the expectations of the course they wish to enroll.  If students who have struggled wish to take a more rigorous course the teacher currently teaching the student, counselors, and/or administrators should discuss the seriousness of the academic course with students.  For example, when a counselor is scheduling courses and notices a 2.0 GPA student wishing to enroll in an AP level social studies course, the counselor may want to meet with the student or direct the student to talk with the AP teacher or previous social studies teacher to be sure they understand the expectations for the course.  If the student still wishes to enroll they should be allowed to enroll and experience the course, even if they struggle academically. 

 

The impact of the experience of students taking a challenging course may not be initially understood by the student.  However, many students describe that higher level courses produced immense benefits even when those benefits were not initially present to the student.  Students may find these courses helped prepare for future academic endeavors or helped the student choose an area they may wish to pursue for a career.  These reasons suggest schools should not keep willing students from the experience of academic challenge. 

After exploring the arguments made for changing the policy of enrollment in higher level courses in our district I encourage you to take the next steps in seeking change.  First, I would advise you select a committee of teachers, administrators, and parents to evaluate our current policy and the proposed change I have put forth in this letter.  This committee should meet to discuss the impacts of a potential change to our policy, including some of the major points outlined in this correspondence, as well as any areas of potential change surrounding this policy in course scheduling, counseling, etc.  The committee should also evaluate policies of surrounding districts which have implemented what I have proposed to assess the potential impacts of such a change.  I would encourage visiting a few schools and talking to teachers, administrators, and parents regarding the expansion of access to higher level courses. 

 

Finally, the committee should provide a recommendation to you on the merits of the policy change I have proposed.  Once recommended you, the superintendent, and the committee should formally recommend the proposal for adoption at a meeting of the school board members where a vote may be taken.  Following adoption of the policy I would keep the committee in place to track the progress and impact of the policy addressing students, parents, teachers, counselors, and administration.  The committee should evaluate how the policy has influenced equity, access, student improvement, student academic success, and any other areas/factors which arise throughout this process.

Although I have put forth a comprehensive and substantive change in the district policy of access to higher level courses for students, I do not propose the policy or its outcomes to be perfect or free of criticisms.  Any policy within our schools which is altered impacts various stakeholders in multiple ways.  We can anticipate many impacts of changes but hardly can be prepared for all implications of any decision.  School systems are incredibly complex and impact far too many individuals and processes to be certain of all implications.  However, I believe in the spirit of the district’s focus on equity of access to student achievement we need to evaluate and implement a new policy for higher level course selection.  Students must be given the opportunity, if so desired to enrich themselves by their own choosing.  The district, should not allow subjective processes of grading or teacher approval to deny any willing student access to academic challenges.  This practice has been unfair, inequitable, and sustained for too long.  We should model for our students and the community our commitment to equity of access and individual choice for all students, regardless of past experience. 

I hope you will give this proposal sincere reflection in the goal of improving the educational experience of all members of school district and surrounding community.

Sincerely,

Jeff Richards

Social Studies Teacher

Canton High School

 

 

 

Cycle 3 Schools as Embryonic Communities

The resources for this cycle prompted deep and central questions as to the role of schools and the impact on students.  The central focus around the concept of the school “community” can be interpreted in various ways and contexts, thus providing numerous avenues for discussion, debate, and conversation.  The idea of the school community, whether as a district, or individual school, or smaller units within the school have common themes and aspects that can enhance student learning and impact the role the classroom teacher will play for students.  Looking forward as educators the concept of community will impact, positively or negatively, any proposal, idea, or policy and thus needs to be addressed at every level.

The article regarding Finland’s educational success, as measured by international standardized testing, prompted many questions for me personally and professionally.  While the point of the article was to describe the success of Finland and their educational principles I began to wonder about how this could or could not “work” in America.  I situated this concept in the context of my own position as a high school social studies teacher in a suburban district.  The first major question regarded the testing policy of Finland.  The article stated Finland does not have many standardized tests throughout the schooling experiences and quoted one teacher as being surprised by the amount of focus and energy U.S. education places on testing. 

With the success Finland has had in recent decades, I wondered how each teacher measures their own practices without testing?  How does the state or nation actually know if their teachers and methods are working?

Although I acknowledge that testing is not the only form of assessment and far from perfect, I still wonder how teachers know that they are effective.  With many teachers I have worked with there tends to be a feeling that we all “know” we are “good” teachers, but when asked “how do you know?” many teachers find it difficult to answer.  With the current debates about evaluations of teachers, schools, etc. this question has fascinated me.  I do not have a great answer for how can we measure “good” teaching and “effective” teaching but I think we need to have that conversation as teacher, even amongst our colleagues as a school community.

The Felner piece regarding smaller learning communities connected with my thoughts on Finland and establishing what is effective and how do we know as teacher.  This article provided tremendous research into the field of smaller learning communities at the school level and even smaller communities within the school.  I have worked for the past three years within a smaller learning community team in my subject area of economics.  The principles discussed in this article about communication, structures, etc are necessary to define before crafting the SLC and need to be reinforced within the group.  I think this structure can work extremely well for various reasons, many cited in the article most importantly the personalization of the school community for the students.  The impact on each individual student is profound when they are aware teachers are working together and have similar expectations for them.  This consistency provides structure and care for students, hopefully resulting in increased motivation.

Working with an SLC has been important for my own professional growth as a teacher.  Colleagues have provided resources and assistance in many situations as well.  The most important aspect of working in an SLC for me has been my ability to have feedback as to my own practice and see if what I do actually works.  We have had many opportunities for peer observations which have been very productive.  This has worked extremely well to increase the overall morale of the teaching staff without the intrusive presence of an official “evaluation”. 

 

Another aspect to the SLC model is the ability to teach the same group of students and know the other teachers on much closer level.  With a school of many thousand students, individuals can feel lost and fragmented from class to class.  However, when students know that a group of about 90 have the same teacher for the core subjects they feel a bit more comfortable but also accountable.  I know the evidence of the SLC model is mixed however, when implemented in our schools I have seen definitive benefits in my own classroom.  How this would translate district-wide or state-wide I do not know.

 

Cycle two: The challenges and opportunities of building classroom communities

The challenges and opportunities of building classroom communities are numerous. With such a variety of opinions within the educational community it is difficult to focus the conversation regarding classroom communities in a singular fashion.  Many teachers currently struggle with building a classroom community due to the amount of variables that exist in education.  Some may be within our own control as classroom teachers, but many things are outside the control of the teacher which causes frustration and difficulty.  Educators need to focus energy and resources into those areas of which we can impact students in a positive way.

There are numerous opportunities for building classroom communities.  The article by Schumer mentioned the concept of differentiated instruction in order to help build a classroom community for students.  This concept is incredibly familiar to me as it is very popular in my district right now.  Our district, as a suburb of the greater Detroit, MI area, is growing rapidly in diversity.  As our district becomes more economically and socially diverse differentiated instruction in the classroom has been pushed by the district for teachers to implement.  Grouping students by ability for activities is one way I have personally attempted to incorporate this concept into my teaching with mixed success. Although my results have been mixed, differentiated instruction has helped me focus on individual students and areas where they struggle.  This focus on the abilities of my students has helped me to become a more focused teacher on specific aspects I can help students with on a daily basis.

Too often educators are seeking the next best idea or the silver bullet for fix education.  I think teachers need to be reflective on all instructional principles or ideas they are using in order to be most effective and build a strong classroom community.  Research suggests that the ultimate “results” of differentiated instruction are inconclusive when compared to schools which track students.  The conversation should not be focused on which approach provides the best educational opportunities for your own classroom but how can any idea help you reach individual students better as a teacher.  Again, although the challenges are many we need to remain focused on what we can do instead of what we cannot do in the classroom. 

Another opportunity to build classroom community is through the use of technological advances.  The Khan academy provides a unique perspective on how we can all expand the educational community and make a world wide classroom marketplace throughtechnology. With students increasingly becoming more connected virtually via cell phones, social media, and other sources education needs to meet students there.  Teachers must strive to find ways to incorporate their education into this virtual world whenever possible allowing students to interact in a variety of contexts.  Many of resources available allow students to become an involved member of their education virtually and for many this can keep them focused on learning instead of ignoring the entire virtual world.  Educators must not ignore the impact of technology on youth in the world today and must strive to understand it better and use it as a tool to build a learning community that can be accessed anywhere at any time.  If we refuse to critically analyze how technology is impacting young people and insist on the traditional model of education we risk alienating students from learning. 

Although I have already discussed how differentiated instruction may be an opportunity to building classroom community, there are challenges with this process as well.  One problem I have seen in practicing differentiated instruction at the high school level is how to make it effective for all students.  When I have grouped students  by ability I have witnessed that the “stronger” ability students ends up frustrated with the other student at times.  They feel they are being slowed down and working for the other student.  Although some students have the personality to help and coach their lower ability partner, it does not always work as smoothly as some would like teachers to believe.  Also, from a practical standpoint the process is rather slow and takes set up time and explanation from the teacher to the students.  Teachers must decide when they are going to use this strategy and what lessons might most benefit for all students. 

The most important lesson for teachers in building classroom community is the relationship between the teacher and the individual students.  We must remember that students need to know teachers care and will work hard to support them no matter what the educational policy or approach.  Teachers must remain critical of themselves and reflective of their own practice in order to constantly improve and effectively educate students.  This was the most important lesson I learned from the resources for this week.  Although there are debates and positives to many ideas and approaches, each teacher must work to build the individual relationship with students in order to benefit each student. 

Cycle 1: Interpretations on the meaning and causes of failure

        The readings for this cycle very much attacked the concept of failure as an institutionalized creation.  Although, many people intend to explain the reasons and causes of failure by individuals, groups, and/or institutions, failure itself needs to be analyzed specifically as to what it actually means.  The materials for this cycle investigated this essential question, while presenting various avenues for the readers to follow in their way to understand failure in a personal sense.  As a current classroom teacher, this was most profound and enlightening for me to think about how this concept relates specifically to my own policies and student behavior.

            The article by Paul Tough was especially revealing to me considering the current educational and political climate surrounding education.  Tough appears to not just explain the problems with failure as a construction, but attempts to seek out improvements for the future of education.  He investigates the idea of taking a perceived negative “failure”, and explaining how it can be transformed into a positive.  I agree very much with Tough’s premise of transforming failure to success and agree that “failure” itself is essential in order to improve and achieve success in education.  In my department, we refer to this concept as “mastery learning” and all teachers agree in allowing students multiple opportunities to “master” their own knowledge in order to be more successful and learn content in a more meaningful way.  Although each teacher provides different avenues for students to achieve mastery, it really is a function of the concept of learning from previous mistakes and improving on one’s skills that Tough describes in the article.  For example, students are given a weekly quiz on Friday, the scores, quiz, and answers, are posted online for students and over the weekend they may choose to review their quiz and correct mistakes, by providing explanations, and may recover a specified amount of credit.  Students, who take advantage of this process regularly, perform better on test, achieve higher grades, and participate more in class activities.  I believe in this process and I think Tough presents a way to alter our collective perception of failure into a positive, successful opportunity for students to achieve.

            Ironically, this past winter I read Paul Tough’s latest book How Children Succeed; Grit, Curiosity,and the power of Character.  Many of the ideas which are hinted at within this article are further explained in this book with much more detail.  His research is profound but I connect with his positive attitude toward education.  He believes the skills are there for ALL students to achieve and we can make more of a difference than we think as teachers, beyond content, but into the non-cognitive skills.  I would highly recommend reading this book. 

            Failure as a socially constructed idea is incredibly important for educators to understand.  R.P. McDermott explained the impact of this on students and how educators must lead society away from explaining why individuals, groups, and institutions “fail” but rather promote success for all.  He explained that far too much time, energy, and resources go into documenting “failures” instead of focusing on improving the learning for children.  I totally agree with sentiment from McDermott.  I also think many teachers and educators are sometimes the worst offenders of this mentality as well.  Often in meetings or casual conversations teachers are focused on what “we” do not have or what we can NOT do as opposed to focusing on the actual impact we CAN make with individual children.  Please do not misunderstand, there are many frustrations with funding or policies or testing with which I wholeheartedly agree, but we need to focus our energy on improving ourselves for those students in front of us.  I think McDermott explained we need to move forward from “failure” on all levels and if we do this in education, the society can and will follow in transforming the understanding of “failure”.

            When reading this week about failure I could not help but be reminded of a concept which I have discussed in classes with students previously.  As a quick introduction into my Economics class, I have students read a chapter of a 1992 book, The Learning Gap by Harold Stevenson and James Stigler.  Students read a chapter entitled, effort and ability.  This chapter displays the difference in US educational model of success as opposed to the Asian model of success in schools.  Very simply put, Americans tend to focus on each person’s individual “abilities” while Asian schools focus on individual effort.  As students read they are usually blown away by the different perceptions of what is success and what is failure in Asian cultures of Japan and China.  In these places the society views a student who cannot master a concept as simply needing more time and the expectation is for that student to continue working (effort) until it is mastered.  The American model and society perceives these students as failures and they are stigmatized because of this perception.  I use this to introduce students to the concept of continued effort even when they are struggling to show the value of hard work and effort to overcome difficulties and the positive impact it can have for their future.   The readings for this week reminded me of this and I have linked the introduction to the book for anyone interested in seeing what it is about. 

Jeff Richards Introduction

My name is Jeff Richards and I am incredibly excited to introduce myself to you all.  I am currently a social studies teacher at Canton High School located in Canton, Michigan.  This is a unique place to work as Canton High School is one of three high schools on 300 acres of property servicing over 6, 300 students daily between the three schools at the Plymouth-Canton Educational Park (PCEP) in Plymouth-Canton Community Schools.  The students may actually have classes in all three of the high schools but are assigned a home school for athletics/activities.  It may sound crazy and hectic, but we seem to make it work.  I am incredibly proud of my school, colleagues, and district and could not be happier about working in public education.  I am incredibly lucky and blessed.

Prior to teaching a Canton, I graduated from Michigan State University in 2009 and completed the Teacher Education Internship program during the 2009-2010 school year and received my teaching certification.  I remain very proud of my experience at Michigan State and decided to continue my educational pursuit at MSU through the Masters in Teaching & Curriculum (MATC) program in 2012.  I hope to improve my understanding of curriculum design and implementation as well as collaborate and experience educational practice from colleagues in the Teacher Educational Graduate program.  My ultimate goal is to continually improve my classroom instruction for student learning personally and learn systematic processes for curriculum improvement. 

Personally, I enjoy spending time with family and friends and my dog (Lily), who share my time between my students and my coaching of high school football and baseball.  I am also a devoted Detroit Tigers fan as well and the Tigers “home” will always be Tiger Stadium for me! As a recent first time homeowner, I am constantly working on the next “to do” project for my home, which never seemed to end.  If given a free moment I enjoy watching movies and reading (mostly history/nonfiction). 

Thanks for reading!