Saturday, November 29, 2008
TONI MORRISON DISCUSSES HER NEW BOOK: A MERCY
Last week at Head-Royce School in Oakland, California, Toni Morrison sat down for an interview with NPR. See part of the interview above.
After the interview and book signing, Morrison allowed a brief meet and greet with a group of African American young men and boys at the Vanguard Conference, the first of its kind in Independent Schools. I was one of the faculty mentors and session leaders for the day.
Since the meet and greet with Morrison was impromptu, meaning most of us didn't know that we we're going to meet the Nobel Laureate that day, we couldn't adequately prep for her visit. One of my colleagues from a San Francisco private high school gamely gave a bit about Morrison's history as we waited for the arrival. After a few halting minutes, I jumped up and attempted to fill in the blanks. I'm happy to say that I'm a Morrison fanatic with a good deal of arcane trivia at my fingertips.
It was surprising to me that less than 1/3 of the boys and young men had ever heard of Toni Morrison, only one of the sixty-five had ever read her work, and only 2/3 admitted to ever reading an African American author in their English classes at all.
Where to begin?
Most of the boys will probably remember their meeting long after the day. Memory is an amazing sleight of hand.
For me, meeting Morrison was like going to my first baseball game with my dad and brother, Michael--circa 1969. I'll never forget the harrowing train and bus rides to Wrigleyville, the long lines stretching blocks to get back on the El, the game in between (a blur), and how Ron Santo clicked his heels following the Cubs' victory over the hated Cardinals.
The boys and young men from grades five to eleven at the Vanguard Conference would remember what the day felt like later when they tell and re-tell their meeting with the Bard from Lorraine, Ohio; they'll remember what they said, what she said, and in an instant, how it was over too soon.
Friday, November 28, 2008
All Kinds of Minds Educator, Mel Levine Accused of Child Molestation
Say it ain't so, Mel!
---
From The new York Times
November 25, 2008
Accused Pediatrician Is Leaving Institute
By TAMAR LEWIN
Dr. Melvin D. Levine, the famed pediatrician who is facing five lawsuits accusing him of molesting young boys during physical examinations, has resigned from All Kinds of Minds, the North Carolina institute he founded in 1995 to train teachers to help children with learning disabilities.
The co-founder of the institute, Charles Schwab, who provided financing and served as co-chairman with Dr. Levine, resigned in September.
The institute, which has teacher-training contracts with two states and dozens of individual schools, said it would continue its work of spreading Dr. Levine’s views on how children learn.
“All Kinds of Minds was formed to create a venue and legacy for his work so the genius of this man wouldn’t die with the individual,” said Mary-Dean Barringer, chief executive of the institute. “Do I think we’ll make it through without him? I do.”
Both Ms. Barringer and Roch Hillenbrand, the new chairman of the board, emphasized that Dr. Levine had not been involved in the day-to-day operations of the institute and that they had been successful, even in the last month, in finding philanthropic support, including a pledge of $2.25 million over three years from the Oak Foundation.
Dr. Levine could not be reached Monday, but he has denied ever touching a patient sexually. No criminal charges have been filed.
Dr. Levine, a Rhodes Scholar who attended Harvard Medical School, has voluntarily suspended his license to practice and is under investigation by the North Carolina Medical Board.
Carmen Durso, the Boston lawyer representing the five plaintiffs, said that more than 50 other former patients or their parents had contacted him with complaints about Dr. Levine.
Until the accusations, Dr. Levine was the unchallenged guru of learning disabilities — or learning differences, as he prefers to call them. Parents flocked to his lectures and lived by his books.
He was seen as a compassionate advocate for children with troubles, insisting that all students could learn and that the job of an educator was to find the approach that worked best for each child.
He gave dozens of lectures a year, holding audiences rapt for hours as he explained the latest findings of neuroscience and how they applied to teaching. Although the lectures were listed on the All Kinds of Minds Web site, he arranged them and was paid for them through a separate company he owned.
Dr. Levine has occupied an unusual public niche, a combination of Dr. Spock, Dr. Phil and Dr. Doolittle. He became a celebrity after his “Misunderstood Minds” ran on PBS in 2002 and he appeared on “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” while living on a farm outside Chapel Hill with hundreds of geese.
Dr. Levine practiced at Children’s Hospital Boston, the pediatric teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School, until 1985, when he moved to the Clinical Center for the Study of Development and Learning at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, where he served as director until he retired in 2006.
Through All Kinds of Minds, Dr. Levine’s teacher training program, Schools Attuned, has reached thousands of schools nationwide.
In New York City, the Department of Education awarded the institute a five-year, $12.5 million contract to train 20,000 teachers. It was awarded without competitive bidding, a department spokeswoman said after the arrangement came to light, because no other organization offered comparable services. The New York contract expired in June.
All Kinds of Minds has continuing contracts with the state education departments in North Carolina and Oklahoma, Ms. Barringer said, but is losing one with South Carolina. Since the accusations against Dr. Levine surfaced last spring, she said, the institute has lost 9 of its 80 contracts with individual schools.
In a prepared statement provided by his lawyer, Alan Schneider, Dr. Levine said he was leaving All Kinds of Minds to devote himself to a new program, Bringing Up Minds, that works directly with parents and clinicians to teach them how to help children succeed in school.
Ms. Barringer said Dr. Levine’s consulting contract with All Kinds of Minds, under which he is paid $150,000 a year, expires in June. The institute also pays about $75,000 a year, she said, as a royalty fee for using Dr. Levine’s intellectual property.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
---
From The new York Times
November 25, 2008
Accused Pediatrician Is Leaving Institute
By TAMAR LEWIN
Dr. Melvin D. Levine, the famed pediatrician who is facing five lawsuits accusing him of molesting young boys during physical examinations, has resigned from All Kinds of Minds, the North Carolina institute he founded in 1995 to train teachers to help children with learning disabilities.
The co-founder of the institute, Charles Schwab, who provided financing and served as co-chairman with Dr. Levine, resigned in September.
The institute, which has teacher-training contracts with two states and dozens of individual schools, said it would continue its work of spreading Dr. Levine’s views on how children learn.
“All Kinds of Minds was formed to create a venue and legacy for his work so the genius of this man wouldn’t die with the individual,” said Mary-Dean Barringer, chief executive of the institute. “Do I think we’ll make it through without him? I do.”
Both Ms. Barringer and Roch Hillenbrand, the new chairman of the board, emphasized that Dr. Levine had not been involved in the day-to-day operations of the institute and that they had been successful, even in the last month, in finding philanthropic support, including a pledge of $2.25 million over three years from the Oak Foundation.
Dr. Levine could not be reached Monday, but he has denied ever touching a patient sexually. No criminal charges have been filed.
Dr. Levine, a Rhodes Scholar who attended Harvard Medical School, has voluntarily suspended his license to practice and is under investigation by the North Carolina Medical Board.
Carmen Durso, the Boston lawyer representing the five plaintiffs, said that more than 50 other former patients or their parents had contacted him with complaints about Dr. Levine.
Until the accusations, Dr. Levine was the unchallenged guru of learning disabilities — or learning differences, as he prefers to call them. Parents flocked to his lectures and lived by his books.
He was seen as a compassionate advocate for children with troubles, insisting that all students could learn and that the job of an educator was to find the approach that worked best for each child.
He gave dozens of lectures a year, holding audiences rapt for hours as he explained the latest findings of neuroscience and how they applied to teaching. Although the lectures were listed on the All Kinds of Minds Web site, he arranged them and was paid for them through a separate company he owned.
Dr. Levine has occupied an unusual public niche, a combination of Dr. Spock, Dr. Phil and Dr. Doolittle. He became a celebrity after his “Misunderstood Minds” ran on PBS in 2002 and he appeared on “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” while living on a farm outside Chapel Hill with hundreds of geese.
Dr. Levine practiced at Children’s Hospital Boston, the pediatric teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School, until 1985, when he moved to the Clinical Center for the Study of Development and Learning at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, where he served as director until he retired in 2006.
Through All Kinds of Minds, Dr. Levine’s teacher training program, Schools Attuned, has reached thousands of schools nationwide.
In New York City, the Department of Education awarded the institute a five-year, $12.5 million contract to train 20,000 teachers. It was awarded without competitive bidding, a department spokeswoman said after the arrangement came to light, because no other organization offered comparable services. The New York contract expired in June.
All Kinds of Minds has continuing contracts with the state education departments in North Carolina and Oklahoma, Ms. Barringer said, but is losing one with South Carolina. Since the accusations against Dr. Levine surfaced last spring, she said, the institute has lost 9 of its 80 contracts with individual schools.
In a prepared statement provided by his lawyer, Alan Schneider, Dr. Levine said he was leaving All Kinds of Minds to devote himself to a new program, Bringing Up Minds, that works directly with parents and clinicians to teach them how to help children succeed in school.
Ms. Barringer said Dr. Levine’s consulting contract with All Kinds of Minds, under which he is paid $150,000 a year, expires in June. The institute also pays about $75,000 a year, she said, as a royalty fee for using Dr. Levine’s intellectual property.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Thursday, November 27, 2008
SCHOOL ME: WHAT'S NEW, WHAT'S HOT
The following video came from another blog http://sfjukebox.blogspot.com/. Here's what they wrote
Kwaito is a South African brand of house that combines house beats and sweet basslines with (usually) lyrics rapped or sort of chanted.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
ALL THE WRONG MOVES: BRIBING KIDS AND SCHOOLS
The Chancellor of the District of Columbia's school system, Michelle Rhee, has been buying off kids with bribes meant to increase their grades. It will probably be some time before we get a definitive idea about how the program is working, but rewarding kids with money has been a tried and true method in many families in trying to get kids to perform up to and beyond their potential.
America's Progressive educator, Alfie Kohn, would answer vociferously in the negative that giving rewards to students for their performance is a bad idea. Kohn, along with a bundle of other progressives, feels that any kind of reward offers a dis-incentive.
Of course, "incentivizing" the poorest of the poor school districts in the United States may seem like a radical notion that just might work, but will it?
If you look at the money given to states and regions to run their schools, the District of Columbia ranks third in spending in the nation behind New Jersey and New York. DC gets $12,801 per child from the US government to run its schools (see US Census press release below)
Isn't spending well above the national average a kind of incentive for schools and educators? Does all of this bribing work?
Do you agree? How far can this argument be extended? Is there another way to get students and schools learning?
--
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2006
Patricia Buscher
Public Information Office
(301) 763-3030/457-3670 (fax)
(301) 457-1037 (TDD)
e-mail:
CB06-53
National Spending Per Student Rises to $8,287
U.S. public school districts spent an average of $8,287 per student in 2004, up from the previous year’s total of $8,019. In all, public elementary and secondary education received $462.7 billion from federal, state and local sources in 2004, up 5.1 percent from 2003.
Findings from the 2004 Annual Survey of Local Government Finances – School Systems show that New Jersey spent $12,981 per student in 2004 -- the most among states and state equivalents -- the U.S. Census Bureau reported today. Utah, at $5,008, spent the least per student.
New York ($12,930) and the District of Columbia ($12,801) were second and third in spending per student. Vermont ($11,128) and Connecticut ($10,788) rounded out the top five. Along with Utah, Idaho ($6,028), Arizona ($6,036), Oklahoma ($6,176) and Mississippi ($6,237) comprised the lowest five in money spent per student.
The state governments contributed the greatest share of public elementary and secondary school funding at $218.1 billion. In 2004, state governments contributed 47.1 percent of school funding, down from 49.0 percent in 2003. Local sources contributed 43.9 percent at $203.3 billion. The federal government’s share, which came to $41.3 billion in 2004, rose from 8.4 to 8.9 percent.
Other findings:
Public school systems spent $472.3 billion, up 4.1 percent from 2003. Spending on elementary-secondary instruction increased from $236.0 billion in 2003 to $245.2 billion in 2004. About $138.5 billion was spent on services that support elementary-secondary instruction, and $52.3 billion was spent on capital outlay.
Instructional salaries totaled $170.6 billion in 2004, up 2.2 percent from 2003.
The tabulations contain data on revenues, expenditures, debt and assets for all individual public elementary and secondary school systems.
-X-
The data are not subject to sampling error, but are subject to possible measurement error and processing errors.
--
America's Progressive educator, Alfie Kohn, would answer vociferously in the negative that giving rewards to students for their performance is a bad idea. Kohn, along with a bundle of other progressives, feels that any kind of reward offers a dis-incentive.
Of course, "incentivizing" the poorest of the poor school districts in the United States may seem like a radical notion that just might work, but will it?
If you look at the money given to states and regions to run their schools, the District of Columbia ranks third in spending in the nation behind New Jersey and New York. DC gets $12,801 per child from the US government to run its schools (see US Census press release below)
Isn't spending well above the national average a kind of incentive for schools and educators? Does all of this bribing work?
Do you agree? How far can this argument be extended? Is there another way to get students and schools learning?
--
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2006
Patricia Buscher
Public Information Office
(301) 763-3030/457-3670 (fax)
(301) 457-1037 (TDD)
e-mail:
CB06-53
National Spending Per Student Rises to $8,287
U.S. public school districts spent an average of $8,287 per student in 2004, up from the previous year’s total of $8,019. In all, public elementary and secondary education received $462.7 billion from federal, state and local sources in 2004, up 5.1 percent from 2003.
Findings from the 2004 Annual Survey of Local Government Finances – School Systems show that New Jersey spent $12,981 per student in 2004 -- the most among states and state equivalents -- the U.S. Census Bureau reported today. Utah, at $5,008, spent the least per student.
New York ($12,930) and the District of Columbia ($12,801) were second and third in spending per student. Vermont ($11,128) and Connecticut ($10,788) rounded out the top five. Along with Utah, Idaho ($6,028), Arizona ($6,036), Oklahoma ($6,176) and Mississippi ($6,237) comprised the lowest five in money spent per student.
The state governments contributed the greatest share of public elementary and secondary school funding at $218.1 billion. In 2004, state governments contributed 47.1 percent of school funding, down from 49.0 percent in 2003. Local sources contributed 43.9 percent at $203.3 billion. The federal government’s share, which came to $41.3 billion in 2004, rose from 8.4 to 8.9 percent.
Other findings:
Public school systems spent $472.3 billion, up 4.1 percent from 2003. Spending on elementary-secondary instruction increased from $236.0 billion in 2003 to $245.2 billion in 2004. About $138.5 billion was spent on services that support elementary-secondary instruction, and $52.3 billion was spent on capital outlay.
Instructional salaries totaled $170.6 billion in 2004, up 2.2 percent from 2003.
The tabulations contain data on revenues, expenditures, debt and assets for all individual public elementary and secondary school systems.
-X-
The data are not subject to sampling error, but are subject to possible measurement error and processing errors.
--
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Michelle Rhee: Better to Be a Marathoner
Sunday, November 23, 2008; B08
By Larry Cuban
In her second year as the District's schools chancellor, Michelle A. Rhee looks like a sprinter. In less than two years, with the full support of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, she has already cut central office administrators, fired principals, closed schools and challenged the teachers union on seniority transfer rights and tenure.
By comparison, Atlanta Superintendent Beverly L. Hall and Austin schools chief Pat Forgione each served a decade and showed strong gains in students' academic achievement. They were long-distance runners. Fixing urban school districts takes marathoners, not sprinters.
Look at Alan Bersin, who ran out of gas as San Diego's superintendent in 2005. Determined to lift student learning rather than preserve school officials' status quo, he reorganized the system and fired administrators. He went after collective bargaining rules that protected seniority rights and incompetent teachers. Union leaders fought him by seeking national and state allies and turning to parents. He exited well before fulfilling his reform agenda.
My point is not that union leaders block reform. In some cities they work closely with superintendents. Nor should superintendents play nice with unions to avoid conflict.
But sprinter superintendents err in jumping on unions too early in their long-distance race for better student achievement. They suffer from ideological myopia. They believe low test scores and achievement gaps between whites and minorities result in large part from knuckle-dragging union leaders defending seniority and tenure rights that protect lousy teachers. Such beliefs reflect a serious misreading of why urban students fail to reach proficiency levels and graduate from high school.
As important as it is to get rid of incompetent teachers, doing so will not turn around the D.C. school system or any other broken district. The failure of urban schools has more to do with turnstile superintendencies, partially implemented standards and other factors that trump the small percentage of teachers who are just putting in time.
This error in thinking has occurred often in districts where impatient superintendents have demonized unions, only to discover that they have stumbled into a war as a result. Once union leaders were convinced that they were fighting for their survival, they converted the battle into an "us vs. them" struggle. When that happens, kiss reform goodbye.
Rhee's ideological push against unions comes much too early in her tenure to improve teaching and learning. Such initiatives fail because they can turn the entire D.C. teaching corps -- including first-rate veteran and mid-career teachers -- against any classroom change. Rhee may deceive herself into believing that teacher whispers about forming another union will split a chapter of the American Federation of Teachers that was founded in 1925. It won't.
"Us vs. them" is not predestined. Boston's Tom Payzant and Carl A. Cohn in Long Beach, Calif., served more than a decade in their districts and received national awards for raising student performance. Neither saw teacher unions as foes to be squashed. They convinced union leaders that it was in teachers' best interests to work with them. Trying to destroy the union will not throw 4,000 teachers behind the mayor and chancellor.
Were the untimely face-off with the D.C. teachers union to spiral into an ugly scrum, angry union leaders and teachers would reach out to allies on the D.C. Council and elsewhere to join against a mayor and chancellor viewed as determined to destroy their organization, much like President Ronald Reagan was with the air traffic controllers union in 1981. Such conflict could possibly end in the mayor dumping his talented chancellor. Another round of high hopes for the D.C. schools would be dashed.
If Rhee knows in her gut that teaching is the heart of good schooling, she needs to think less like a Teach for America sprinter and more like a long-distance runner.
-- Larry Cuban
Palo Alto, Calif.
The writer is a former D.C. Public Schools teacher and was superintendent of schools in Arlington from 1974 to 1981.
Reprinted from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/21/AR2008112103222.html
By Larry Cuban
In her second year as the District's schools chancellor, Michelle A. Rhee looks like a sprinter. In less than two years, with the full support of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, she has already cut central office administrators, fired principals, closed schools and challenged the teachers union on seniority transfer rights and tenure.
By comparison, Atlanta Superintendent Beverly L. Hall and Austin schools chief Pat Forgione each served a decade and showed strong gains in students' academic achievement. They were long-distance runners. Fixing urban school districts takes marathoners, not sprinters.
Look at Alan Bersin, who ran out of gas as San Diego's superintendent in 2005. Determined to lift student learning rather than preserve school officials' status quo, he reorganized the system and fired administrators. He went after collective bargaining rules that protected seniority rights and incompetent teachers. Union leaders fought him by seeking national and state allies and turning to parents. He exited well before fulfilling his reform agenda.
My point is not that union leaders block reform. In some cities they work closely with superintendents. Nor should superintendents play nice with unions to avoid conflict.
But sprinter superintendents err in jumping on unions too early in their long-distance race for better student achievement. They suffer from ideological myopia. They believe low test scores and achievement gaps between whites and minorities result in large part from knuckle-dragging union leaders defending seniority and tenure rights that protect lousy teachers. Such beliefs reflect a serious misreading of why urban students fail to reach proficiency levels and graduate from high school.
As important as it is to get rid of incompetent teachers, doing so will not turn around the D.C. school system or any other broken district. The failure of urban schools has more to do with turnstile superintendencies, partially implemented standards and other factors that trump the small percentage of teachers who are just putting in time.
This error in thinking has occurred often in districts where impatient superintendents have demonized unions, only to discover that they have stumbled into a war as a result. Once union leaders were convinced that they were fighting for their survival, they converted the battle into an "us vs. them" struggle. When that happens, kiss reform goodbye.
Rhee's ideological push against unions comes much too early in her tenure to improve teaching and learning. Such initiatives fail because they can turn the entire D.C. teaching corps -- including first-rate veteran and mid-career teachers -- against any classroom change. Rhee may deceive herself into believing that teacher whispers about forming another union will split a chapter of the American Federation of Teachers that was founded in 1925. It won't.
"Us vs. them" is not predestined. Boston's Tom Payzant and Carl A. Cohn in Long Beach, Calif., served more than a decade in their districts and received national awards for raising student performance. Neither saw teacher unions as foes to be squashed. They convinced union leaders that it was in teachers' best interests to work with them. Trying to destroy the union will not throw 4,000 teachers behind the mayor and chancellor.
Were the untimely face-off with the D.C. teachers union to spiral into an ugly scrum, angry union leaders and teachers would reach out to allies on the D.C. Council and elsewhere to join against a mayor and chancellor viewed as determined to destroy their organization, much like President Ronald Reagan was with the air traffic controllers union in 1981. Such conflict could possibly end in the mayor dumping his talented chancellor. Another round of high hopes for the D.C. schools would be dashed.
If Rhee knows in her gut that teaching is the heart of good schooling, she needs to think less like a Teach for America sprinter and more like a long-distance runner.
-- Larry Cuban
Palo Alto, Calif.
The writer is a former D.C. Public Schools teacher and was superintendent of schools in Arlington from 1974 to 1981.
Reprinted from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/21/AR2008112103222.html
D.C. Tries Cash as a Motivator In School: Initiative Is Aimed At Middle Grades
By V. Dion Haynes and Michael Birnbaum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, August 22, 2008; A01
D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee announced plans yesterday to boost dismal achievement at half the city's middle schools by offering students an unusual incentive: cash.
For years, school officials have used detention, remedial classes, summer school and suspensions to turn around poorly behaved, underachieving middle school students, with little results. Now they are introducing a program that will pay students up to $100 per month for displaying good behavior.
Beginning in October, 3,000 students at 14 middle schools will be eligible to earn up to 50 points per month and be paid $2 per point for attending class regularly and on time, turning in homework, displaying manners and earning high marks. A maximum of $2.7 million has been set aside for the program, and the money students earn will be deposited every two weeks into bank accounts the system plans to open for them.
The system has 28 middle-grade schools. Rhee will select the schools to participate in the pilot program.
"We believe this is the time for radical intervention," Rhee said at a news conference outside Hardy Middle School in Northwest Washington. "We're very excited about this particular program."
Costs of the incentive will be split almost equally between the school system and Harvard's American Inequity Lab, which studies poverty and race issues. The program, Capital Gains, will be run by Roland G. Fryer Jr., an economics professor with the lab. Fryer also operates a pilot program in New York City public schools.
In justifying the program, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) said the city has spent an inordinate amount on a school bureaucracy over the years that has failed students. Instead, he said, why not direct some of the cash to the students.
"If it seems outside of the box, it is," Fenty said.
A cash-incentive program that pays high school students as much as $500 for earning a 3 or more on an Advanced Placement test has been launched in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Kentucky and Virginia.
A study of the program released yesterday by a Cornell University economist said the incentive resulted in higher scores and an increase in the number of students attending college.
Alfie Kohn, an independent researcher whose book, "Punished by Rewards," details the downside of such programs, said incentives "undermine the very thing you're trying to promote by getting them hooked on the rewards."
Rhee said she is targeting sixth- through eighth-graders because some students in the group typically have had intractable behavior and academic problems. She said middle school is a pivotal time because many students are setting the patterns to become high school scholars or dropouts.
District middle-schoolers, often trapped in violent and academically weak campuses, typically flee the system in higher proportions than other groups, school officials said. Thirty-six percent of the city's middle-grade students are proficient in reading, and 33 percent are proficient in math, Rhee said.
The schools need to focus on "how we can ensure that students are engaged, that they are invested in their education," Rhee said. "I think it's incredibly important to make sure students take ownership of their learning."
Parents had mixed reactions to the program. Some said it was an understandable solution to an intractable problem. Others said students should not receive money to go to class. "I just totally disagree with this," said Dionne Davis, whose daughter attends seventh grade at Hardy Middle School. "I think the incentive should come from within, just to want to do well, rather than doing it for a dollar." Her daughter was not so sure.
"I think it's a good idea," said Samantha, 11. "I think middle schoolers should have rewards for getting good grades and stuff on their tests. . . . I would save it for college and maybe give some to charity."
Some school activists expressed shock and anger at the incentive.
"That's pretty pitiful," said Mary Levy, director of the Public Education Reform Project for the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. "It makes me sad to see we've sunk so low that we have to pay kids to show up."
Rhee said that if the incentive program is successful she could expand it to 14 other middle schools and possibly high schools. Parents can choose not to allow children to participate in the program.
Fryer said D.C. school officials will establish criteria for the program and he will track the progress. "The key is innovation, not just sitting around watching the test scores dwindle," he said.
Fryer is working with 62 schools in New York, which provides as much as $500 for fourth- and seventh-graders who perform well on a standardized test.
He said his staff is collecting data to gauge progress. Surveys of students and parents show support for the concept, he said. Results showed that 96 percent of the schools participating in the program reported that they were excited about the money; 91 percent reported an increased focus on exams; and 59 percent reported better classroom performance.
"The kids unquestionably love it. Whether that is translating into higher performance, I can't tell you for a fact" until a report is released in October, said David Cantor, spokesman for the New York Department of Education. The program, funded by private donations, cost $400,000 last year.
A program in Virginia is paying students for passing AP scores at 14 high schools in rural and high-poverty areas across the state.
Students who receive grades of 3 or more receive $100 per test, said Paul Nichols, president of Virginia Advanced Study Strategies. The program also trains AP teachers, subsidizes test costs and provides extra materials to AP classes. It began in spring, but has had an immediate effect on enrollment.
"The numbers of students in these schools that have signed up to take AP classes has more than doubled," Nichols said. "In the small rural schools, it has tripled."
The District's incentive program is in line with Rhee's efforts to break new ground with her approach to urban school reform. She garnered national attention with her contract proposal that offers teachers salaries well above $100,000 in exchange for relinquishing tenure and seniority rights. She is scheduled to speak on an education panel at the Democratic National Convention in Denver next week.
Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company
from Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/21/AR2008082103874_2.html?sid=ST2008082103937&s_pos=
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, August 22, 2008; A01
D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee announced plans yesterday to boost dismal achievement at half the city's middle schools by offering students an unusual incentive: cash.
For years, school officials have used detention, remedial classes, summer school and suspensions to turn around poorly behaved, underachieving middle school students, with little results. Now they are introducing a program that will pay students up to $100 per month for displaying good behavior.
Beginning in October, 3,000 students at 14 middle schools will be eligible to earn up to 50 points per month and be paid $2 per point for attending class regularly and on time, turning in homework, displaying manners and earning high marks. A maximum of $2.7 million has been set aside for the program, and the money students earn will be deposited every two weeks into bank accounts the system plans to open for them.
The system has 28 middle-grade schools. Rhee will select the schools to participate in the pilot program.
"We believe this is the time for radical intervention," Rhee said at a news conference outside Hardy Middle School in Northwest Washington. "We're very excited about this particular program."
Costs of the incentive will be split almost equally between the school system and Harvard's American Inequity Lab, which studies poverty and race issues. The program, Capital Gains, will be run by Roland G. Fryer Jr., an economics professor with the lab. Fryer also operates a pilot program in New York City public schools.
In justifying the program, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) said the city has spent an inordinate amount on a school bureaucracy over the years that has failed students. Instead, he said, why not direct some of the cash to the students.
"If it seems outside of the box, it is," Fenty said.
A cash-incentive program that pays high school students as much as $500 for earning a 3 or more on an Advanced Placement test has been launched in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Kentucky and Virginia.
A study of the program released yesterday by a Cornell University economist said the incentive resulted in higher scores and an increase in the number of students attending college.
Alfie Kohn, an independent researcher whose book, "Punished by Rewards," details the downside of such programs, said incentives "undermine the very thing you're trying to promote by getting them hooked on the rewards."
Rhee said she is targeting sixth- through eighth-graders because some students in the group typically have had intractable behavior and academic problems. She said middle school is a pivotal time because many students are setting the patterns to become high school scholars or dropouts.
District middle-schoolers, often trapped in violent and academically weak campuses, typically flee the system in higher proportions than other groups, school officials said. Thirty-six percent of the city's middle-grade students are proficient in reading, and 33 percent are proficient in math, Rhee said.
The schools need to focus on "how we can ensure that students are engaged, that they are invested in their education," Rhee said. "I think it's incredibly important to make sure students take ownership of their learning."
Parents had mixed reactions to the program. Some said it was an understandable solution to an intractable problem. Others said students should not receive money to go to class. "I just totally disagree with this," said Dionne Davis, whose daughter attends seventh grade at Hardy Middle School. "I think the incentive should come from within, just to want to do well, rather than doing it for a dollar." Her daughter was not so sure.
"I think it's a good idea," said Samantha, 11. "I think middle schoolers should have rewards for getting good grades and stuff on their tests. . . . I would save it for college and maybe give some to charity."
Some school activists expressed shock and anger at the incentive.
"That's pretty pitiful," said Mary Levy, director of the Public Education Reform Project for the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. "It makes me sad to see we've sunk so low that we have to pay kids to show up."
Rhee said that if the incentive program is successful she could expand it to 14 other middle schools and possibly high schools. Parents can choose not to allow children to participate in the program.
Fryer said D.C. school officials will establish criteria for the program and he will track the progress. "The key is innovation, not just sitting around watching the test scores dwindle," he said.
Fryer is working with 62 schools in New York, which provides as much as $500 for fourth- and seventh-graders who perform well on a standardized test.
He said his staff is collecting data to gauge progress. Surveys of students and parents show support for the concept, he said. Results showed that 96 percent of the schools participating in the program reported that they were excited about the money; 91 percent reported an increased focus on exams; and 59 percent reported better classroom performance.
"The kids unquestionably love it. Whether that is translating into higher performance, I can't tell you for a fact" until a report is released in October, said David Cantor, spokesman for the New York Department of Education. The program, funded by private donations, cost $400,000 last year.
A program in Virginia is paying students for passing AP scores at 14 high schools in rural and high-poverty areas across the state.
Students who receive grades of 3 or more receive $100 per test, said Paul Nichols, president of Virginia Advanced Study Strategies. The program also trains AP teachers, subsidizes test costs and provides extra materials to AP classes. It began in spring, but has had an immediate effect on enrollment.
"The numbers of students in these schools that have signed up to take AP classes has more than doubled," Nichols said. "In the small rural schools, it has tripled."
The District's incentive program is in line with Rhee's efforts to break new ground with her approach to urban school reform. She garnered national attention with her contract proposal that offers teachers salaries well above $100,000 in exchange for relinquishing tenure and seniority rights. She is scheduled to speak on an education panel at the Democratic National Convention in Denver next week.
Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company
from Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/21/AR2008082103874_2.html?sid=ST2008082103937&s_pos=
Monday, November 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)